On 25.08.23 г. 15:14 ч., Kai Huang wrote:
> Intel Trusted Domain Extensions (TDX) protects guest VMs from malicious
> host and certain physical attacks. TDX specs are available in [1].
>
> This series is the initial support to enable TDX with minimal code to
> allow KVM to create and run TDX guests. KVM support for TDX is being
> developed separately[2]. A new KVM "guest_memfd()" to support private
> memory is also being developed[3]. KVM will only support the new
> "guest_memfd()" infrastructure for TDX.
>
> Also, a few first generations of TDX hardware have an erratum[4], and
> require additional handing.
>
> This series doesn't aim to support all functionalities, and doesn't aim
> to resolve all things perfectly. All other optimizations will be posted
> as follow-up once this initial TDX support is upstreamed.
>
> Hi Dave/Kirill/Peter/Tony/David and all,
>
> Thanks for your review on the previous versions. Appreciate your review
> on this version and any tag if patches look good to you. Thanks!
>
> This version was based on "Unify TDCALL/SEAMCALL and TDVMCALL assembly"
> series, which was based on latest tip/x86/tdx, requested by Peter:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
>
> Please also help to review that series. Thanks!
>
Are there any major outstanding issues preventing this to be merged? The
review has been somewhat quiet and most of the outstanding issues seems
to be nitpicks?
On Thu, 2023-09-28 at 10:48 +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
> On 25.08.23 г. 15:14 ч., Kai Huang wrote:
> > Intel Trusted Domain Extensions (TDX) protects guest VMs from malicious
> > host and certain physical attacks. TDX specs are available in [1].
> >
> > This series is the initial support to enable TDX with minimal code to
> > allow KVM to create and run TDX guests. KVM support for TDX is being
> > developed separately[2]. A new KVM "guest_memfd()" to support private
> > memory is also being developed[3]. KVM will only support the new
> > "guest_memfd()" infrastructure for TDX.
> >
> > Also, a few first generations of TDX hardware have an erratum[4], and
> > require additional handing.
> >
> > This series doesn't aim to support all functionalities, and doesn't aim
> > to resolve all things perfectly. All other optimizations will be posted
> > as follow-up once this initial TDX support is upstreamed.
> >
> > Hi Dave/Kirill/Peter/Tony/David and all,
> >
> > Thanks for your review on the previous versions. Appreciate your review
> > on this version and any tag if patches look good to you. Thanks!
> >
> > This version was based on "Unify TDCALL/SEAMCALL and TDVMCALL assembly"
> > series, which was based on latest tip/x86/tdx, requested by Peter:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
> >
> > Please also help to review that series. Thanks!
> >
>
>
> Are there any major outstanding issues preventing this to be merged? The
> review has been somewhat quiet and most of the outstanding issues seems
> to be nitpicks?
Hi Nikolay,
I am addressing comments from Rick, e.g., some additional handling to
S3/hibernation is needed. I'll post the next version soon, which I hope can be
the candidate to be merged. Thanks!