Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sat, 5 Jun 2021 13:03:53 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Cc:     Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@kernel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v2-fix-v2 1/1] x86: Introduce generic protected guest
 abstractionn
Message-ID: <YLtaGXcjCMsSyT/a@zn.tnic>
References: <20210527042356.3983284-2-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
 <20210601211417.2177598-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
 <YLkcIuL2qvo0hviU@zn.tnic>
 <YLkcUts9dWDkDKpY@zn.tnic>
 <1c8938fb-c9e9-af51-5224-70fc869eedea@amd.com>
 <YLqmGzgXo0jFRhpw@zn.tnic>
 <12bba26f-5605-fabf-53ea-f0bc1bb9db44@amd.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <12bba26f-5605-fabf-53ea-f0bc1bb9db44@amd.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 06:31:03PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> If Intel has XYZ but AMD does not, you don't want to WARN, just return false.

Aha, *now*, I see what you mean. Ok, so the reason why I added the
WARN is to sanity-check whether we're handling all possible VM_* or
PROT_GUEST_* flags properly and whether we're missing some. As a
debugging help. It'll get removed before applying I guess.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette