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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 050F2C4707A for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 19:57:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2015613E9 for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 19:57:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231803AbhEUT6t (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2021 15:58:49 -0400 Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:45724 "EHLO mga05.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229539AbhEUT6p (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2021 15:58:45 -0400 IronPort-SDR: NtVTZ2MRFCt3rRSwDY+6ndqYmoYekIG/YpJ+dL95K9g5zl8PG8XzZWnVL3j3/7/jLFKr+JFOgx JoYt6iV6cwcA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,9991"; a="287103265" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,319,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="287103265" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 May 2021 12:57:22 -0700 IronPort-SDR: XejAXBwJ5QqkG3tyPUTzaK3tQuEh1jvG9AxkoP8Pqx4rnRyZlKTz4sCsIcIGbA2I1bBiaEitEn 3erk34Z+JGIw== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,319,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="441215658" Received: from orxpovpvmu02.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO skuppusw-mobl5.amr.corp.intel.com) ([10.213.181.51]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 May 2021 12:57:21 -0700 Subject: Re: [RFC v2-fix 1/1] x86/traps: Add #VE support for TDX guest To: Dave Hansen , Peter Zijlstra , Andy Lutomirski Cc: Tony Luck , Andi Kleen , Kirill Shutemov , Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan , Dan Williams , Raj Ashok , Sean Christopherson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sean Christopherson References: <20210518000957.257869-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> <3573599f-56bc-f21e-7a7e-0d441ab9d68e@linux.intel.com> <867d1271-ff97-40b0-16a5-ccf875c0ad7b@intel.com> From: "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan" Message-ID: <23effbe3-b008-8351-4cb4-34bc37c45605@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 12:57:19 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <867d1271-ff97-40b0-16a5-ccf875c0ad7b@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/21/21 12:15 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 5/21/21 11:45 AM, Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan wrote: >> You have any other comments on this patch? If not, can you reply with your >> Reviewed-by tag? > > Sathya, I've been rather busy with your own patches and your colleagues > TDX patches. I've clearly communicated to you which patches I plan to > provide a review for. I'll get to them, although not quite at the speed > you would like. > My impression so far is, for TDX patch submissions, you usually reply to the patch submission/comments in 1-2 days (sorry if this assumption is incorrect). Since I did not see any major objections for this patch, I was just checking with you to understand if this patch review is pending due to something missing from my end. My intention was not to rush you, but just to understand if it needs some work from my end. Sorry if the reminder emails trouble you. Since we are aiming for v5.14 merge window, I am trying to avoid any delays from my end. > If you would like to get a quicker review, I'd highly suggest you go > find some of your TDX colleagues' code that needs its quality improved > and help by providing them reviews. Reviews are a two-way street, not > just a service provided by maintainers to contributors. > > You could also make good use of your time by going back over all of the > review comments I've made up to this point and doing a pass over your > work to ensure that I don't have to continue to repeat myself and waste > review efforts. I have considered your comments and fixed the common issues reported by you in this patch-set. But when addressing recent comments and while updating the commit log, some of these issues got introduced again. I will try to avoid them in future. -- Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy Linux Kernel Developer