> On Feb 27, 2025, at 1:52 AM, Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > !-------------------------------------------------------------------| > CAUTION: External Email > > |-------------------------------------------------------------------! > > > > On 27.02.25 г. 2:07 ч., Sean Christopherson wrote: >> Define independent macros for the RWX protection bits that are enumerated >> via EXIT_QUALIFICATION for EPT Violations, and tie them to the RWX bits in >> EPT entries via compile-time asserts. Piggybacking the EPTE defines works >> for now, but it creates holes in the EPT_VIOLATION_xxx macros and will >> cause headaches if/when KVM emulates Mode-Based Execution (MBEC), or any >> other features that introduces additional protection information. >> Opportunistically rename EPT_VIOLATION_RWX_MASK to EPT_VIOLATION_PROT_MASK >> so that it doesn't become stale if/when MBEC support is added. >> No functional change intended. >> Cc: Jon Kohler <jon@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@xxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@xxxxxxxx> LGTM, but any chance we could hold this until I get the MBEC RFC out? My apologies on the delay, I caught a terrible chest cold after we met about it, followed by a secondary case of strep! Just getting back into the grind now, so I need to rebase and send those out. For anyone curious, the drafts are here: https://github.com/JonKohler/linux/tree/mbec-rfc-v1-6.12 https://github.com/JonKohler/qemu/tree/mbec-rfc-v1 I need to incorporate some early off-list review comments and send it out properly, but in reference to this specific change, you can see how I approached it here: https://github.com/JonKohler/linux/commit/0d2e82704ed3eb28c105967c8acd7907523ded5b
