Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-193579-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: <20240517191630.GC412700@ls.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <20240520233227.GA29916@ls.amr.corp.intel.com> <a071748328e5c0a85d91ea89bb57c4d23cd79025.camel@intel.com>
 <20240521161520.GB212599@ls.amr.corp.intel.com> <20240522223413.GC212599@ls.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <9bc661643e3ce11f32f0bac78a2dbfd62d9cd283.camel@intel.com>
 <20240522234754.GD212599@ls.amr.corp.intel.com> <4a6e393c6a1f99ee45b9020fbd2ac70f48c980b4.camel@intel.com>
 <20240523000100.GE212599@ls.amr.corp.intel.com> <35b63d56fe6ebd98c61b7c7ca1680da91c28a4d0.camel@intel.com>
 <20240524075519.GF212599@ls.amr.corp.intel.com> <31a2b098797b3837597880d5827a727fee9be11e.camel@intel.com>
 <CABgObfa+vx3euEXwopBBzt7BEVT8MV7HuuLayRKxURnopO3f=w@mail.gmail.com> <b6217ba2f75366d25ff46cd72dcf671cdc57f340.camel@intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <b6217ba2f75366d25ff46cd72dcf671cdc57f340.camel@intel.com>
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 09:25:46 +0200
Message-ID: <CABgObfYCnC2qoMHmKx7QK=pEoARfcGw=F-epXYT4z6uoJeH_-w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/16] KVM: x86/tdp_mmu: Support TDX private mapping for
 TDP MMU
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
Cc: "isaku.yamahata@gmail.com" <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>, "seanjc@google.com" <seanjc@google.com>, 
	"Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@intel.com>, "sagis@google.com" <sagis@google.com>, 
	"isaku.yamahata@linux.intel.com" <isaku.yamahata@linux.intel.com>, "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@intel.com>, 
	"Aktas, Erdem" <erdemaktas@google.com>, 
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "dmatlack@google.com" <dmatlack@google.com>, 
	"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@intel.com>, "kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 4:14=E2=80=AFAM Edgecombe, Rick P
<rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2024-05-28 at 19:47 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 6:27=E2=80=AFPM Edgecombe, Rick P
> > <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > I don't see benefit of x86_ops.max_gfn() compared to kvm->arch.max_=
gfn.
> > > > But I don't have strong preference. Either way will work.
> > >
> > > The non-TDX VM's won't need per-VM data, right? So it's just unneeded=
 extra
> > > state per-vm.
> >
> > It's just a cached value like there are many in the MMU. It's easier
> > for me to read code without the mental overhead of a function call.
>
> Ok. Since this has (optimization) utility beyond TDX, maybe it's worth sp=
litting
> it off as a separate patch? I think maybe we'll pursue this path unless t=
here is
> objection.

Yes, absolutely.

Paolo