On Mon, 2025-07-14 at 17:23 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jul 2025 10:20:18 +1200, Kai Huang wrote: > > This series follows Sean's suggestions [1][2] to: > > > > - Reject vCPU scope KVM_SET_TSC_KHZ ioctl for TSC protected vCPU > > - Reject VM scope KVM_SET_TSC_KHZ ioctl when vCPUs have been created > > > > .. in the discussion of SEV-SNP Secure TSC support series. > > > > [...] > > Applied patch 2 to kvm-x86 fixes, with a tweaked changelog to call out that > TDX support hasn't yet been released, i.e. that there is no established ABI > to break. > > Applied patch 1 to kvm-x86 misc, with tweaked documentation to not imply that > userspace "must" invoke the ioctl. I think this is the last patch I'll throw > into misc for 6.17? So in theory, if it breaks userspace, I can simply > truncate it from the pull request. Thanks! > > [1/2] KVM: x86: Reject KVM_SET_TSC_KHZ VM ioctl when vCPUs have been created > https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/dcbe5a466c12 > [2/2] KVM: x86: Reject KVM_SET_TSC_KHZ vCPU ioctl for TSC protected guest > https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/e51cf184d90c Btw, in the second patch it seems you have: Fixes; adafea1 ("KVM: x86: Add infrastructure for secure TSC") Shouldn't we follow the standard format, i.e., Fixes: adafea110600 ("KVM: x86: Add infrastructure for secure TSC") ?
