From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 853DEEC873F for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2023 15:33:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233666AbjIGPcP (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Sep 2023 11:32:15 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54898 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S245700AbjIGPaE (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Sep 2023 11:30:04 -0400 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B5E410F6; Thu, 7 Sep 2023 08:29:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1694100578; x=1725636578; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Urz8J26AUOtbbaftdYy1+eG3zzf8pqaVITlpJ9CGDIc=; b=YhvGGj5CvyyNG216/Z4G+A95eboUQknTiX7U0W3gNb187lX7HBdocvBe wgbwEnG9ELZpf04Es38HdSDtdNhLF9MqLtBliqx1ZZ1tD3mkz5mvI7dxB hFAgSi4KC47IJ0We7vG6hPPSnQ+dYQg/TLIEiqxVuLkWN99rVkyQB2xBR ZVn4tNzHRHj0YinXByN8BW9gsovZgY3d6CgmmbByB1tS2s9eZy7MEVNIW FQtTh9yNsfMJsVmKOBpNWMRQIhjap6AdQdcdWTrYbQskph1sKbZUUWg2N ZwY4RorfJ4uk4pk1TIOOBw5VkmgV8BzNNrdA+Y4AOKVHuoW+/TmgOV6ob A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10826"; a="357676568" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.02,235,1688454000"; d="scan'208";a="357676568" Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Sep 2023 07:15:22 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10826"; a="735516999" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.02,235,1688454000"; d="scan'208";a="735516999" Received: from ningle-mobl2.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.209.13.77]) ([10.209.13.77]) by orsmga007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Sep 2023 07:15:21 -0700 Message-ID: <9ffb7a3b-cf20-617a-e4f1-8a6a8a2c5972@intel.com> Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2023 07:15:21 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.15.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] /dev/mem: Do not map unaccepted memory Content-Language: en-US To: Adrian Hunter , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Borislav Petkov , Andrew Morton Cc: Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Lorenzo Stoakes , Tom Lendacky , Baoquan He , Vivek Goyal , Dave Young , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org References: <20230906073902.4229-1-adrian.hunter@intel.com> <20230906073902.4229-4-adrian.hunter@intel.com> From: Dave Hansen In-Reply-To: <20230906073902.4229-4-adrian.hunter@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 9/6/23 00:39, Adrian Hunter wrote: > Support for unaccepted memory was added recently, refer commit > dcdfdd40fa82 ("mm: Add support for unaccepted memory"), whereby > a virtual machine may need to accept memory before it can be used. > > Do not map unaccepted memory because it can cause the guest to fail. Doesn't /dev/mem already provide a billion ways for someone to shoot themselves in the foot? TDX seems to have added the 1,000,000,001st. Is this really worth patching?