> > > > > > > + /* > > > + * TDX requires those methods to enable VMXON by > > > + * kvm_hardware_enable/disable_all() > > > + */ > > > + static_call_update(kvm_x86_check_processor_compatibility, > > > + ops->runtime_ops->check_processor_compatibility); > > > + static_call_update(kvm_x86_hardware_enable, > > > + ops->runtime_ops->hardware_enable); > > > + static_call_update(kvm_x86_hardware_disable, > > > + ops->runtime_ops->hardware_disable); > > > r = ops->hardware_setup(); > > > if (r != 0) > > > goto out_mmu_exit; > > > > Hmm.. I think this is ugly. Perhaps we should never do any > > static_call(kvm_x86_xxx)() in hardware_setup(), because hardware_setup() is > > called before kvm_ops_update() and may update vendor's kvm_x86_ops. > > > > So probably use hardware_enable_all() in hardware_setup() is a bad idea. > > > > I think we have below options on how to handle: > > > > 1) Use VMX's kvm_x86_ops directly in tdx_hardware_setup(). For instance, > > something like below: > > > > int __init tdx_hardware_setup(struct kvm_x86_ops *x86_ops) > > { > > ... > > > > cpus_read_lock(); > > r = on_each_cpu(vt_x86_ops.hardware_enable, ...); > > if (!r) > > r = tdx_module_setup(); > > on_each_cpu(vt_x86_ops.hardware_disable, ...); > > cpus_read_unlock(); > > > > ... > > } > > > > But this doesn't clean up nicely when there's some particular cpus fail to do > > hardware_enable(). To clean up nicely, we do need additional things similar to > > the hardware_enable_all() code path: a per-cpu variable or a cpumask_t + a > > wrapper of vt_x86_ops->hardware_enable() to track which cpus have done > > hardware_enable() successfully. > > > > 2) Move those static_call_update() into tdx_hardware_setup() so they are TDX > > code self-contained. But this would require exposing kvm_x86_ops as symbol, > > which isn't nice either. > > > > 3) Introduce another kvm_x86_init_ops->hardware_post_setup(), which is called > > after kvm_ops_update(). > > > > Personally, I think 3) perhaps is the most elegant one, but not sure whether > > Sean/Paolo has any opinion. > > I think we can simply update the ops before calling hardware_enable() and > clean up ops on failure. > > This doesn't work because hardware_setup() may update vendor's kvm_x86_ops. If you do kvm_ops_update() before hardware_setup(), you need to manually update those updated (in hardware_setup()) callbacks again after.