> On 17 Dec 2025, at 7:38 PM, Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 02:38:10PM +0100, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
>> On 16.12.2025 05:41, Ani Sinha wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 15 Dec 2025, at 10:34 PM, Maciej S. Szmigiero
>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 12.12.2025 16:03, Ani Sinha wrote:
>>>>> On confidential guests when the KVM virtual machine file descriptor
>>>>> changes as
>>>>> a part of the reset process, event file descriptors needs to be
>>>>> reassociated
>>>>> with the new KVM VM file descriptor. This is achieved with the help of a
>>>>> callback handler that gets called when KVM VM file descriptor changes
>>>>> during
>>>>> the confidential guest reset process.
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ani Sinha <[email protected]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Have you actually tested confidential guests with VMBus or is this a change
>>>> "for completeness sake" that can't be exercised in the current state of
>>>> things?
>>>
>>> No I have not tested the changes with VMBus. It’s more for completeness
>>> sake as you have correctly put it. If you suggest, I can drop the change.
>>>
>>
>> I have mixed feelings here: on the one hand this support could be useful in
>> the future, on the other hand we probably don't want to add dead and
>> untestable code to QEMU.
>>
>> Let's see what other maintainers think about adding such code in order to
>> be consistent across different subsystems.
>
> In any case the testing status of these changes should be noted in the
> commit messages. There are some xen changes in the series where I
> suspect they are untested too ...
Yes all the Xen stuff is untested. I was thinking of dropping those patches but
posted them for completeness and suggestion from maintainers. If we think we
should drop them, I will be happy to do so.
