[lkml]   [2021]   [Jun]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC v2-fix-v2 1/1] x86: Introduce generic protected guest abstractionn
On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 05:01:31PM -0500, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> The first is analogous to sme_active(), the second to sev_active() and the
> third to mem_encrypt_active(). Just my opinion, though...

Yeah, or cc_has() where "cc" means "confidential computing". Or "coco"...

Yeah, no good idea yet.

> I don't think you want a WARN_ON_ONCE() here. The code will be written to
> work with either SEV or TDX, so we shouldn't warn on a check for a TDX
> supported feature when running on AMD (or vice-versa).

That's an AMD-specific path so it would warn only when a flag is used
which is unknown/unused yet on AMD.


 \ /
  Last update: 2021-06-05 00:17    [W:0.305 / U:0.736 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site