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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 BFD89C433B4 for ; Fri, 14 May 2021 09:24:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95C7A61407 for ; Fri, 14 May 2021 09:24:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232052AbhENJZT (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 May 2021 05:25:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40064 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229525AbhENJZS (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 May 2021 05:25:18 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de (mail.skyhub.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:190:11c2::b:1457]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFE70C061574; Fri, 14 May 2021 02:24:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ec2f0b2c00e3a8a74f5e6ed04b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f0b:2c00:e3a8:a74f:5e6e:d04b]) (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 4939A1EC03A0; Fri, 14 May 2021 11:24:06 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1620984246; 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=3L2pN2C7pvwIMORYei93VLaKVD2Mv4ej5v0DHAWsgjo=; b=mrMJTKp8SRrQk1dHV9Pue7ne6iLTxJTzmrKZwEmnfMTYzqH9P+/FgsaiUFt3GW1XZJiFnm 6e1bTgZNLEDMwV9b8Gu5GnYEHp3694yzumwWJOwwK/0hIkhEQtkN/vLWSpsuUln9W4I0/k ca6hSVoEDVdvsgXyDUE/w/uWbXCKdUM= Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 11:24:03 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Ashish Kalra , seanjc@google.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, joro@8bytes.org, thomas.lendacky@amd.com, x86@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, srutherford@google.com, venu.busireddy@oracle.com, brijesh.singh@amd.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] mm: x86: Invoke hypercall when page encryption status is changed Message-ID: References: <20210513043441.GA28019@ashkalra_ubuntu_server> <7ac12a36-5886-cb07-cc77-a96daa76b854@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7ac12a36-5886-cb07-cc77-a96daa76b854@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 10:03:18AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Ok, so explain to me how this looks from the submitter standpoint: he reads > your review of his patch, he acknowledges your point with "Yes, it makes > sense to signal it with a WARN or so", and still is treated as shit. How is me asking about the user experience of it all, treating him like shit?! How should I have asked this so that it is not making you think I'm treating him like shit? Because treating someone like shit is not in my goals. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette