From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23D021B1507; Thu, 12 Sep 2024 15:26:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726154788; cv=none; b=eqTirpUQpEiS9qY4k+Suyk5iy7MQveaQMF10SeBnxocg/mKsKyHgO1EI0dEli9o/hZ9je/4IrBm4EnzphkqhmdzgsnhP6KmNHwu49lZT2mGtyDKi6laRxSoONDY1h+7QVMhYWgjGrzvhCrCVTg+jbzkAAeC/TvJibfUtXVj4AEs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726154788; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qtcc1ZciIdZolKlLiDSYskpFnpUHArS7uyjMhfd76ms=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=jMIgmXDGk0cQuMJ5WkU2EQGMyXc5ZC8N9SgozyjLsf7+xkqWO5Go3jGBF0GlXFD/yY/kWhaedpZ3q9fRxumOsDHL24up9seL3a8rfjGxwDjQMWLk1rLj9vWTW73G0c5KPeeGlb1QVjti87/idUpUTHBugBhXWfxN80hQMzzmnbs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=m/DZwdzU; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="m/DZwdzU" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1726154787; x=1757690787; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qtcc1ZciIdZolKlLiDSYskpFnpUHArS7uyjMhfd76ms=; b=m/DZwdzUyMD132VjSKttLYamsS5PxSKwNUkBEQUgsL7AaMbLOSTOpfFD TqwqZVzDgaghHjM33qbbCOTk6anlumd8Gyg4LsIYhZnDsM+kITS1OvDah 4UWrjRRvwyge75n8VuhD2a84fHF+coP+0Om04SEMGU/2ehr2drtEAuMsM eTYTLdZE+UH//x3z9BhDQWEEjpeQpDhXnBMThOV9IJaqg5CYkEyxmNNFa 8OcU145Nr2Il+5Nix6sO8hyAttxNm7z0O65l25KBylb+FKlbO7+tOAtkh yA/fiVwhWtWddSWoqtM7KjAsZ/lYUJq8RA1r17PaeZSuFoTtBnjGhV6j2 A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: YdHnuQY6TjSQvw2Hq2kEgg== X-CSE-MsgGUID: NKJf79TGQEaarVZzsIqXVA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11193"; a="25146646" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,223,1719903600"; d="scan'208";a="25146646" Received: from fmviesa002.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.142]) by orvoesa110.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Sep 2024 08:26:26 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: RpN5h161Tk2sgmjRczUDSQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: TwU3xIeNSL2UqLZzIRqPLw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.10,223,1719903600"; d="scan'208";a="90988346" Received: from xiaoyaol-hp-g830.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.124.224.38]) ([10.124.224.38]) by fmviesa002-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 12 Sep 2024 08:26:24 -0700 Message-ID: <9477e3e3-e9cf-4a6a-87d1-bb7836146ed0@intel.com> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 23:26:21 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 25/25] KVM: x86: Add CPUID bits missing from KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Rick Edgecombe , seanjc@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kai.huang@intel.com, isaku.yamahata@gmail.com, tony.lindgren@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20240812224820.34826-1-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> <20240812224820.34826-26-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> <05cf3e20-6508-48c3-9e4c-9f2a2a719012@redhat.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Xiaoyao Li In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 9/12/2024 10:48 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 4:45 PM Xiaoyao Li wrote: >>> KVM is not going to have any checks, it's only going to pass the >>> CPUID to the TDX module and return an error if the check fails >>> in the TDX module. >> >> If so, new feature can be enabled for TDs out of KVM's control. >> >> Is it acceptable? > > It's the same as for non-TDX VMs, I think it's acceptable. another question is for patch 24, will we keep the filtering of the configurable CPUDIDs in KVM_TDX_CAPABILITIES with KVM_GET_SUPPORTED_CPUID? > Paolo >