From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
Cc: Vishal Annapurve <vannapurve@google.com>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
pbonzini@redhat.com, seanjc@google.com, erdemaktas@google.com,
ackerleytng@google.com, jxgao@google.com, sagis@google.com,
oupton@google.com, pgonda@google.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev,
chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com, isaku.yamahata@gmail.com,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/1] x86/tdx: Route safe halt execution via tdx_safe_halt()
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2025 13:19:46 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <702c5acb-6bab-4940-a8f1-c346373167bd@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <qzl5vkhykj4anuvjrhfco5qoeuib3oskffnxnqbcszotttnnqa@up5b4xl5l55g>
On 2/3/25 12:09, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
...
> But Sean's proposal with HLT check before enabling interrupts looks better
> to me.
"Sean's proposal" being this:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/Z5l6L3Hen9_Y3SGC@google.com/
?
Is that just intended to quietly fix up a hlt-induced #VE? I'm not sure
that's a good idea. The TDVMCALL is slow, but the #VE is also presumably
quite slow. This is (presumably) getting called in an idle path which is
actually one of the most performance-sensitive things we have in the kernel.
Or am I missing the point of Sean's proposal?
I don't mind having the #VE handler warn about the situation if we end
up there accidentally.
I'd much rather have a kernel configured in a way that we are pretty
sure there's no path to even call hlt.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-03 21:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-29 23:25 [PATCH V2 1/1] x86/tdx: Route safe halt execution via tdx_safe_halt() Vishal Annapurve
2025-01-30 9:27 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-01-30 17:24 ` Vishal Annapurve
2025-01-30 18:48 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-01-30 19:45 ` Vishal Annapurve
2025-01-31 8:13 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-02-01 2:32 ` Vishal Annapurve
2025-02-03 15:59 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-02-03 17:01 ` Vishal Annapurve
2025-02-03 20:06 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-02-03 18:06 ` Dave Hansen
2025-02-03 20:09 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2025-02-03 21:19 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2025-02-03 22:08 ` Vishal Annapurve
2025-02-04 17:32 ` Dave Hansen
2025-02-04 18:52 ` Vishal Annapurve
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=702c5acb-6bab-4940-a8f1-c346373167bd@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=ackerleytng@google.com \
--cc=chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=erdemaktas@google.com \
--cc=isaku.yamahata@gmail.com \
--cc=jxgao@google.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@google.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=pgonda@google.com \
--cc=sagis@google.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vannapurve@google.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox