From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB6328F58 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 17:58:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1679507884; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=M64+Ax7Z1KLZxDdHoHWW0+vnpH6T6Y8a3gCnVFAODd8=; b=UsvGmmZVD4rSCAIPh3xHgkPNybis/7pW2SzGBqjMa9ee8+aGvKjBiF5BMMjSFnB6vygES+ Z21ynPbBwFDcLgptlFqfISPPlGhGZAoubQCRYeWZHFyhKLN/WaonlK/ax9L1HGFr6KPk8y oKtvAxCtaZbz6JHvxrMk0eqoYQB8wjg= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-611-fB22SGmqPHKLTcSoRANu8Q-1; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 13:57:59 -0400 X-MC-Unique: fB22SGmqPHKLTcSoRANu8Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 73D383C218A1; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 17:57:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.33.36.160]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78C85492C13; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 17:57:57 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 17:57:55 +0000 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Marc Orr Cc: jejb@linux.ibm.com, =?utf-8?B?SsO2cmcgUsO2ZGVs?= , amd-sev-snp@lists.suse.com, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] COCONUT Secure VM Service Module for SEV-SNP Message-ID: Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= References: <66eee693371c11bbd2173ad5d91afc740aa17b46.camel@linux.ibm.com> <7d615af4c6a9e5eeb0337d98c9e9ddca6d2cbdef.camel@linux.ibm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.9 (2022-11-12) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.9 On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 06:29:29PM -0700, Marc Orr wrote: > On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 1:05 PM James Bottomley wrote: > > > > > Of course we could start changing linux-svsm to support the same > > > goals, but I think the end result will not be very different from > > > what COCONUT looks now. > > > > That's entirely possible, so what are the chances of combining the > > projects now so we don't get a split in community effort? > > Very cool to see this announcement and read the discussion! > > One SVSM will be better for Google too. Specifically: > - One hypervisor/SVSM startup sequence is easier for us to get working > - One SVSM is easier to test/qualify/deploy > - Generally speaking, things will be easier for us if all SNP VMs > start running off of the same "first mutable code". I.e., the same > SVSM, UEFI, etc. I agree with this from the Red Hat side. We would prefer there to be a standard / common SVSM used by all [OSS] hypervisors/clouds, to reduce permutations that guest OS vendors/tenants have to develop/test/deploy against. It looks like even developing one high quality feature rich SVSM is a non-trivial undertaking, so I agree with James that it is undesirable to divide community resources across many competing impls, without a compelling justification. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|