On Mon, Jan 18, 2021 at 12:44:58PM +0100, Martin Radev wrote: > Your comment makes sense but then that would require the cooperation > of these vendors and the cloud providers to agree on something meaningful. > I am also not sure whether the end result would be better than hardening > this interface to catch corruption. There is already some validation in > unmap path anyway.
So what? If you guys want to provide a new capability you'll have to do work. And designing a new protocol based around the fact that the hardware/hypervisor is not trusted and a copy is always required makes a lot of more sense than throwing in band aids all over the place.
