From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH][1/4] Intel(R) Trusted Execution Technology support: xen Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:59:30 +0100 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: "Cihula, Joseph" , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, xense-devel@lists.xensource.com Cc: "Xu, James" , "Wang, Shane" , "Wei, Gang" , "Zhai, Edwin" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 30/8/07 17:17, "Cihula, Joseph" wrote: >>> Changes to Xen for Intel(R <> ) TXT >>> support. >> >> Is there any documentation for the processor changes for TXT support >> (e.g., the additions to IA32_FEATURE_CONTROL_MSR, among others)? > Googling >> for TXT is not very helpful. :-) Okay, current situation on the Xen path is that it's all checked in except: * the changes to shutdown.c and smp.c * the bits that actually interface with sboot (that's most of the bits inside CONFIG_TXT). For the former, I'd like it to be a separate cleanup patch, with some explanation of why it's required. For example, whay is the code movement in smp.c required at all? For the latter, I would like Xen to have its own asm-x86/sboot.h, even though this causes a small amount of code duplication outside of th esboot module itself. It is supposed to become a stable interface after all. The bit syou need from uuid.h can also be included in Xen's sboot.h. All the names you create in Xen's sboot.h should have a suitable common prefix on them. I guess mle_ might do the trick, although I don't actually know what MLE stands for?! That's all for now. The sboot module itself is scary big. :-/ Oh, you can find the current tip to re-merge against at http://xenbits.xensource.com/staging/xen-unstable.hg -- Keir