Re: [CRITICAL for 4.18] Re: [PATCH v5 00/10] runstate/time area registration by (guest) physical address

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

On 05/10/2023 23:40, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
>
> On 05/10/2023 19:58, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > I see this series has been committed.  But it's broken in a really
> > fundamental way.
> Thanks for pointing out. But I'd like to understand how I come to only 
> hear about those concerns on the series after committing. Did I miss any 
> thread? Even if this series has been pending for over 6 months, should 
> have I waited longer before committing?
> Furthermore, Jan pointed out that this series was discussed recently 
> during the x86 meeting. Did you raise any concern during the call and 
> they were not carried on the ML?
> > This is a new extension with persistent side effects to an existing part
> > of the guest ABI.
> >
> > Yet there doesn't appear to be any enumeration that the interface is
> > available to begin with.  Requiring the guest to probe subops, and
> > having no way to disable it on a per-domain basis is unacceptable, and
> > has exploded on us more times than I care to count in security fixes
> > alone, and that doesn't even cover the issues Amazon have reported over
> > the years.
> Indeed. But, AFAIR, all those patches got stuck because of diverging 
> opinions between you and you. Can we finally come to an agreement on how 
The second 'you' was meant to be Jan. I didn't intend to say you were 
disagreing with yourself.
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall