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=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,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 5C963C3A5A7 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 08:34:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3252223431 for ; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 08:34:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=shipmail.org header.i=@shipmail.org header.b="J1VY4NLk" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728300AbfIDIeq (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Sep 2019 04:34:46 -0400 Received: from ste-pvt-msa2.bahnhof.se ([213.80.101.71]:33339 "EHLO ste-pvt-msa2.bahnhof.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725774AbfIDIep (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Sep 2019 04:34:45 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ste-pvt-msa2.bahnhof.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51B553F5F0; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 10:34:28 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: ste-pvt-msa2.bahnhof.se; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=shipmail.org header.i=@shipmail.org header.b=J1VY4NLk; dkim-atps=neutral X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at bahnhof.se Authentication-Results: ste-ftg-msa2.bahnhof.se (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=shipmail.org Received: from ste-pvt-msa2.bahnhof.se ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ste-ftg-msa2.bahnhof.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TF6Qxe2YrX2F; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 10:34:27 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail1.shipmail.org (h-205-35.A357.priv.bahnhof.se [155.4.205.35]) (Authenticated sender: mb878879) by ste-pvt-msa2.bahnhof.se (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 109A53F346; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 10:34:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (h-205-35.A357.priv.bahnhof.se [155.4.205.35]) by mail1.shipmail.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 25C2136117F; Wed, 4 Sep 2019 10:34:25 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=shipmail.org; s=mail; t=1567586065; bh=MbtBfVZaBumDkBlAtpFFrFhKmgiWkoQ1b1+zCTqFcPk=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=J1VY4NLk8W4zmUOI/PrVpikNX2CTceCnda/zQbfYcicCF3vdBOuNsDCJA92eFp5ht 3lD12c2pd8Zfdi7N5HHMYy89RLMKOp4gwBPCXMmdA/a6GjY6jA2yivh93n/ObwJ+L3 Bnjg6fVWttF9EPPWca+yjsxjPyKFv0Igx7Tf3A8c= Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] drm/ttm, drm/vmwgfx: Correctly support support AMD memory encryption To: Dave Hansen , Andy Lutomirski Cc: Daniel Vetter , dri-devel , pv-drivers@vmware.com, VMware Graphics , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Tom Lendacky , Thomas Hellstrom , Peter Zijlstra , Dave Hansen , Heiko Carstens , Christian Borntraeger , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , =?UTF-8?Q?Christian_K=c3=b6nig?= References: <20190903131504.18935-1-thomas_os@shipmail.org> <20190903131504.18935-4-thomas_os@shipmail.org> <6d0fafcc-b596-481b-7b22-1f26f0c02c5c@intel.com> <7fa3b178-b9b4-2df9-1eee-54e24d48342e@intel.com> <44b094c8-63fe-d9e5-1bf4-7da0788caccf@shipmail.org> <6d122d62-9c96-4c29-8d06-02f7134e5e2a@shipmail.org> <2759de53-123f-5972-a246-bbf959439c5d@intel.com> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_Hellstr=c3=b6m_=28VMware=29?= Organization: VMware Inc. Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2019 10:34:24 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2759de53-123f-5972-a246-bbf959439c5d@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Dave, On 9/4/19 1:10 AM, Dave Hansen wrote: > Thomas, this series has garnered a nak and a whole pile of thoroughly > confused reviewers. > > Could you take another stab at this along with a more ample changelog > explaining the context of the problem? I suspect that's a better place > to start than having us all piece together the disparate parts of the > thread. Sure. I was just trying to follow up on the emails  to get a better understanding what got people confused in the first place. Thanks, Thomas