Re: [RFC PATCH v2 06/26] x86/cpu/intel: Allow SGX virtualization without Launch Control support

Kai Huang
2021-01-21T05:00:37Z

On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:27:27 -0800 Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 1/20/21 2:36 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 20, 2021, Dave Hansen wrote:
> >> BTW, CONFIG_X86_SGX_VIRTUALIZATION is a pretty porky name. Maybe just
> >> CONFIG_X86_SGX_VIRT?
> > Mmm, bacon. I used the full "virtualization" to avoid any possible confusion
> > with virtual memory. The existing sgx_get_epc_virt_addr() in particular gave me
> > pause.
> >
> > I agree it's long and not consistent since other code in this series uses "virt".
> > My thinking was that most shortand versions, e.g. virt_epc, would be used only
> > in contexts that are already fairly obvious to be KVM/virtualization related,
> > whereas the porcine Kconfig would help establish that context.
>
> Not a big deal either way. I agree that "virt" can be confusing.
>
> Considering that:
>
> +config X86_SGX_VIRTUALIZATION
> + depends on ... KVM_INTEL

It is already in patch 3: Introduce virtual EPC for use by KVM guests:

+config X86_SGX_VIRTUALIZATION
+ bool "Software Guard eXtensions (SGX) Virtualization"
+ depends on X86_SGX && KVM_INTEL

>
> Calling it X86_SGX_KVM doesn't seem horrible either.