Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Improve KVM_SET_TSC_KHZ handling for CoCo VMs

[Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>]

On Tue, Jul 15, 2025, Kai Huang wrote:
> On Mon, 2025-07-14 at 17:23 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:20:18 +1200, Kai Huang wrote:
> > > This series follows Sean's suggestions [1][2] to:
> > > 
> > >  - Reject vCPU scope KVM_SET_TSC_KHZ ioctl for TSC protected vCPU
> > >  - Reject VM scope KVM_SET_TSC_KHZ ioctl when vCPUs have been created
> > > 
> > > .. in the discussion of SEV-SNP Secure TSC support series.
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > 
> > Applied patch 2 to kvm-x86 fixes, with a tweaked changelog to call out that
> > TDX support hasn't yet been released, i.e. that there is no established ABI
> > to break.
> > 
> > Applied patch 1 to kvm-x86 misc, with tweaked documentation to not imply that
> > userspace "must" invoke the ioctl.  I think this is the last patch I'll throw
> > into misc for 6.17?  So in theory, if it breaks userspace, I can simply
> > truncate it from the pull request.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> > 
> > [1/2] KVM: x86: Reject KVM_SET_TSC_KHZ VM ioctl when vCPUs have been created
> >       https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/dcbe5a466c12
> > [2/2] KVM: x86: Reject KVM_SET_TSC_KHZ vCPU ioctl for TSC protected guest
> >       https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/e51cf184d90c
> 
> Btw, in the second patch it seems you have:
> 
>   Fixes; adafea1 ("KVM: x86: Add infrastructure for secure TSC")
> 
> Shouldn't we follow the standard format, i.e.,
> 
>   Fixes: adafea110600 ("KVM: x86: Add infrastructure for secure TSC")

Ugh, yes, the semi-colon is just a typo.  New hash:

  https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/b24bbb534c2d