Re: [PATCH V5 1/4] x86/paravirt: Move halt paravirt calls under CONFIG_PARAVIRT

[Dave Hansen]

On 2/20/25 13:16, Vishal Annapurve wrote:
> Since enabling CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL is too bloated for TDX guest
> like platforms, move HLT and SAFE_HLT paravirt calls under
> CONFIG_PARAVIRT.

I guess it's just one patch, but doesn't this expose CONFIG_PARAVIRT=y
users to what _was_ specific to CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL=y? According to the
changelog, TDX users shouldn't have to use use PARAVIRT_XXL, so
PARAVIRT=y and PARAVIRT_XXL=n must be an *IMPORTANT* configuration for
TDX users.

Before this patch, those users would have no way to hit the
unsafe-for-TDX pv_native_safe_halt(). After this patch, they will hit it.

So, there are two possibilities:

 1. This patch breaks bisection for an important TDX configuration
 2. This patch's conjecture that PARAVIRT_XXL=n is important for TDX
    is wrong and it is not necessary in the first place.

What am I missing?