From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83C331D8E06; Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:51:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.9 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736160682; cv=none; b=UIEPthfP5e8DV9QeGPUIZo1beXjyc+0xvWtrER1Kfs6CUew7ncA5s2hS4ROH7dWdjZVppEq6CV5PpBV7Ie6nlmgXCkyC2ATo9wQSGsbUUGOqBLv2adyTTxxeSLzf4wpAsAPVCu8z+76XrP7teHVuUbMsxVG86VsnVjJaL1erc6o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736160682; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TPeY/JM1f9CQLCX8R8m6iizmmy81cmTo366j/gz58rg=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=ENC2ScQNoDuW6uOwJtZKq/T8xGH14G+6KkRVoe3P1hHnEAefTLKuGre9InL5d3JCgmeoP+Budk+ajwG6gxiJAQzKTOBsjiwHMNRDuYH6t1FCE0Ugf1AmDt4ijpX7LeAGXrP5lteRyX7xM0Zq+qftGQMg2dhUlNrrGpfuJnkRZZs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=eKymy5NA; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.9 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="eKymy5NA" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1736160681; x=1767696681; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=TPeY/JM1f9CQLCX8R8m6iizmmy81cmTo366j/gz58rg=; b=eKymy5NAUwe5rbYyhzAmI7n0DlwTHgFsxgEE3flZY+k/3czJlcGFFVyW FWtFi+4wd0fmLZOQyIEJ0jcfdYGX52msUC9K7JvjcoP8bOpYNKT9s39lk 1UkjncMSeVjzybtYYRgW+nXhTktRADs9wFMQbVXRdluMxdbZXKpLesSyg JMQmnEqlQH246y6Skb/mn26sGUNLMbUIEX+rQQ/LrQGeUacCQugr5LqiD Gn9r2W76esfo6h5P4oFImvrwYbsIo+QLI/preqkP4PUgzHepCxwE7QTT4 0J/kLj8BRuEkpIjeSV1M7IyCQ3ECPZzbm6CiUAV4QPfWsFc0+N5S18dvb w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 6W4m1YieQm+aoR9vJ8tORA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: hsLQR5qWQLKqvZxe5lVnlA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11307"; a="46976627" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,292,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="46976627" Received: from orviesa001.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.141]) by fmvoesa103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Jan 2025 02:51:19 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 5ZdqgnQUQduTQXeQdXfsDQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: HK4ySL+ISTyv6Qfzn4Qd7Q== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,224,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="139754639" Received: from xiaoyaol-hp-g830.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.124.247.1]) ([10.124.247.1]) by smtpauth.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Jan 2025 02:51:17 -0800 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:51:13 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] KVM: TDX: TDX interrupts To: Binbin Wu , pbonzini@redhat.com, seanjc@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org Cc: rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com, kai.huang@intel.com, adrian.hunter@intel.com, reinette.chatre@intel.com, tony.lindgren@linux.intel.com, isaku.yamahata@intel.com, yan.y.zhao@intel.com, chao.gao@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20241209010734.3543481-1-binbin.wu@linux.intel.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Xiaoyao Li In-Reply-To: <20241209010734.3543481-1-binbin.wu@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/9/2024 9:07 AM, Binbin Wu wrote: > Hi, > > This patch series introduces the support of interrupt handling for TDX > guests, including virtual interrupt injection and VM-Exits caused by > vectored events. > (I'm not sure if it is the correct place to raise the discussion on KVM_SET_LAPIC and KVM_SET_LAPIC for TDX. But it seems the most related series) Should KVM reject KVM_GET_LAPIC and KVM_SET_LAPIC for TDX?