Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v9 0/4] Add safe unaccepted memory behavior

["Lendacky, Thomas" <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>]

On 1/16/23 04:28, Gerd Hoffmann via groups.io wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 10:34:15AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> On 1/13/23 10:23, Dionna Glaze via groups.io wrote:
>>>> However, *NONE* of this points me in the direction of saying that we
>>>> should have an OS/firmware protocol to negotiate whether the firmware or
>>>> OS does page acceptance other than the existing UEFI memory map bit.
>>> We know of distributions that are going to release SEV-SNP support
>>> without unaccepted memory support,
>>
>> Well, I guess that's a bit of a different problem.
>>
>> I'd love to hear from the distros what they're planning on carrying
>> outside of mainline and what their plans are for the kernel side of this
>> series.
> 
> Fedora has near zero additional patches, so it pretty much depends on
> how mainline merges stuff.  If SEV-SNP or TDX or both will land in an
> upstream release before support for unaccepted memory lands too you'll

Sorry, just saw this...

SEV-SNP guest support has already landed upstream and is part of the 5.19 
kernel. So without this interface, anyone using a newer OVMF with a 5.19 
to whatever kernel just before unaccepted memory finally gets pulled into, 
would have issues.

Thanks,
Tom

> see that in Fedora kernels, and I guess likewise in most non-enterprise
> distros.
> 
> RHEL/CentOS typically requires mainline acceptance too for backports, so
> it likewise depends on upstream merging, and additionally rhel release
> planning comes into play.  In case unaccepted memory support lands later
> than TDX it could (depending on timing) very well be that the choices
> are to either backport TDX without unaccepted memory support, or move
> both TDX support and unaccepted memory support to a later release.
> 
> take care,
>    Gerd
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>