On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 3:34 PM Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 02:43:15PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > On 1/24/24 13:55, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > > The patchset adds bits and pieces to get kexec (and crashkernel) work on > > > TDX guest. > > > > > > The last patch implements CPU offlining according to the approved ACPI > > > spec change poposal[1]. It unlocks kexec with all CPUs visible in the target > > > kernel. It requires BIOS-side enabling. If it missing we fallback to booting > > > 2nd kernel with single CPU. > > > > > > Please review. I would be glad for any feedback. > > > > Hi Kirill, > > > > I have a very basic question: is there a reason why this series does not > > revert commit cb8eb06d50fc, "x86/virt/tdx: Disable TDX host support when > > kexec is enabled"? > > My patchset enables kexec for TDX guest. The commit you refer blocks kexec > for host. TDX host and guest have totally different problems with handling > kexec. Kai looks on how to get host kexec functional. Yeah, that was right there in the cover letter (and I should have gotten a clue from the many references to CC_* constants...). Somebody pointed me to this series as "the TDX kexec series from Intel" and I had some tunnel vision issues. Sorry for the noise! But since I have your attention, do you have a pointer to the corresponding edk2 series? Thanks, Paolo _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
