Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-176823-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240510211024.556136-1-michael.roth@amd.com> <CABgObfZxeqfNB4tETpH4PqPTnTi0C4pGmCST73a5cTdRWLO9Yw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABgObfZxeqfNB4tETpH4PqPTnTi0C4pGmCST73a5cTdRWLO9Yw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 12 May 2024 10:17:06 +0200
Message-ID: <CABgObfZ=FcDdX=2kT-JZTq=5aYeEAkRQaS4A8Wew44ytQPCS7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PULL 00/19] KVM: Add AMD Secure Nested Paging (SEV-SNP)
 Hypervisor Support
To: Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, jroedel@suse.de, 
	thomas.lendacky@amd.com, vkuznets@redhat.com, pgonda@google.com, 
	rientjes@google.com, tobin@ibm.com, bp@alien8.de, vbabka@suse.cz, 
	alpergun@google.com, ashish.kalra@amd.com, nikunj.dadhania@amd.com, 
	pankaj.gupta@amd.com, liam.merwick@oracle.com, papaluri@amd.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 9:14=E2=80=AFAM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>=
 wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 11:17=E2=80=AFPM Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.c=
om> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Paolo,
> >
> > This pull request contains v15 of the KVM SNP support patchset[1] along
> > with fixes and feedback from you and Sean regarding PSC request process=
ing,
> > fast_page_fault() handling for SNP/TDX, and avoiding uncessary
> > PSMASH/zapping for KVM_EXIT_MEMORY_FAULT events. It's also been rebased
> > on top of kvm/queue (commit 1451476151e0), and re-tested with/without
> > 2MB gmem pages enabled.
>
> Pulled into kvm-coco-queue, thanks (and sorry for the sev_complete_psc
> mess up - it seemed too good to be true that the PSC changes were all
> fine...).

.. and there was a missing signoff in "KVM: SVM: Add module parameter
to enable SEV-SNP" so I ended up not using the pull request. But it
was still good to have it because it made it simpler to double check
what you tested vs. what I applied.

Also I have already received the full set of pull requests for
submaintainers, so I put it in kvm/next.  It's not impossible that it
ends up in the 6.10 merge window, so I might as well give it a week or
two in linux-next.

Paolo


Paolo