On Mon, 2025-02-24 at 19:57 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 2/21/25 00:27, Huang, Kai wrote: > > Hi Paolo, > > > > This patch still doesn't address a bug Chao pointed out, that the > > __do_tdx_cleanup() can be called from __do_tdx_bringup() with cpus_read_lock() > > being hold, so we need to use cpuhp_remove_state_nocalls_cpuslocked() in > > __do_tdx_cleanup(). > > > > I posted a diff to address here: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/46ea74bcd8eebe241a143e9280c65ca33cb8dcce.camel@xxxxxxxxx/T/#m1e86328e69b27e6cc9978f90df923144d699c350 > > > > It would be great if you could squash to the kvm-coco-queue. There will be some > > minor rebase conflict to the rest patches, though, so if you want me to send out > > fixup patch(es) for you to squash please do let me know. > > > > Btw, the diff also moves the 'enable_virt_at_load' check to > > kvm_can_support_tdx(), which isn't related to this issue. Below is the diff > > (also attached) w/o this code change but only to address the above bug if you > > prefer. > > Thank, I applied this one. > Thanks! > In fact I think we can remove > kvm_can_support_tdx() altogether and inline it in tdx_bringup(), > since there are other checks like MOVDIR64B. Or we can put all the pre-requirement checks to kvm_can_support_tdx() -- both work for me :-) > > The conflicts are not problematic so I'm happy to solve them for you. Thanks Paolo!
