On Fri, Apr 01, 2022 at 12:23:28AM +1300, Kai Huang <kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2022-03-04 at 11:48 -0800, isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > From: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > To Keep the case of non TDX intact, introduce a new config option for > > private KVM MMU support. At the moment, this is synonym for > > CONFIG_INTEL_TDX_HOST && CONFIG_KVM_INTEL. The new flag make it clear > > that the config is only for x86 KVM MMU. > > > > Signed-off-by: Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig | 4 ++++ > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig b/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig > > index 2b1548da00eb..2db590845927 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig > > @@ -136,4 +136,8 @@ config KVM_MMU_AUDIT > > config KVM_EXTERNAL_WRITE_TRACKING > > bool > > > > +config KVM_MMU_PRIVATE > > + def_bool y > > + depends on INTEL_TDX_HOST && KVM_INTEL > > + > > endif # VIRTUALIZATION > > I am really not sure why need this. Roughly looking at MMU related patches this > new config option is hardly used. You have many code changes related to > handling private/shared but they are not under this config option. I don't want to use CONFIG_INTEL_TDX_HOST in KVM MMU code. I think the change to KVM MMU should be a sort of independent from TDX. But it seems failed based on your feedback. -- Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx>
