lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/8] x86/mtrr: support setting MTRR state for software defined MTRRs
From
On 14.02.23 09:58, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 08:04:47AM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> Okay, if you really want to dictate the allowed use cases (this seems to be
>
> Read upthread - TDX guests cause #VEs for MTRR accesses. #VEs which are
> unneeded and should be avoided if possible.

Of course, I don't question the need for TDX guests to use the overwrite.

>
>> a layering violation), but you are the maintainer of that code.
>
> And why are you so against catching misuses of this, which should
> absolutely *not* be needed by anything else

I just don't like the idea of trying to catch all possible misuses in
lower levels, at the same time introducing the need to modify those
tests in case a new valid use case is popping up.

But as said, you are the maintainer, so its your final decision.


Juergen
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-keys][unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-27 00:21    [W:0.309 / U:0.084 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site