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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1216C48BE8 for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 23:39:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8C0E6135A for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2021 23:39:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235200AbhFRXmB (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jun 2021 19:42:01 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:48442 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231697AbhFRXmA (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Jun 2021 19:42:00 -0400 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ec2f0dd80047b5b1fd1153f566.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f0d:d800:47b5:b1fd:1153:f566]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id 69CA71EC056D; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 01:39:49 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1624059589; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=uzD+CRq9e3tCGtxdW12AZAUDuKDuE835JN1hDqc1yMI=; b=l2Pqz7PImrWy2EtK7Xzf/0TUMV76f0g/36l3T7vSgEO4iGZubtnUgTiGh8nsurwjFnMZtM xEwXUWS8vYDGaZQXODhbF1CypSYU+a9pMb93piPHVstRqkZuokPhXpjgAdK44kBjK6RJXb 5kaUs6FFXywBpwfipdfLlRVQrrbB5mI= Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2021 01:39:39 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Andy Lutomirski , Peter H Anvin , Dave Hansen , Tony Luck , Dan Williams , Andi Kleen , Kirill Shutemov , Sean Christopherson , Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/11] x86/cpufeatures: Add TDX Guest CPU feature Message-ID: References: <20210618225755.662725-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> <20210618225755.662725-4-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210618225755.662725-4-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 03:57:47PM -0700, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote: > Add CPU feature detection for Trusted Domain Extensions support. TDX > feature adds capabilities to keep guest register state and memory > isolated from hypervisor. > > For TDX guest platforms, executing CPUID(eax=0x21, ecx=0) will return > following values in EAX, EBX, ECX and EDX. > > EAX: Maximum sub-leaf number: 0 > EBX/EDX/ECX: Vendor string: > > EBX = "Inte" > EDX = "lTDX" > ECX = " " > > So when above condition is true, set X86_FEATURE_TDX_GUEST feature cap > bit. > > Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan > Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen > Reviewed-by: Tony Luck > --- > > Changes since v2: > * Fixed debug prints as per Borislav suggestion. > > Changes since v1: > * Fixed commit log issues reported by Borislav. > * Moved header file include to the start of tdx.h. > * Added pr_fmt for TDX. > * Simplified cpuid_has_tdx_guest() implementation as per > Borislav comments. >From Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst: "Both Tested-by and Reviewed-by tags, once received on mailing list from tester or reviewer, should be added by author to the applicable patches when sending next versions. However if the patch has changed substantially in following version, these tags might not be applicable anymore and thus should be removed. Usually removal of someone's Tested-by or Reviewed-by tags should be mentioned in the patch changelog (after the '---' separator)." IOW, for the next revisions of your patchsets, you should drop Reviewed-by: tags on patches when they've changed more than trivially because otherwise those tags have no meaning at all. Also, please take the time to peruse the above document on the kernel process while waiting. Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette