From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.skyhub.de (mail.skyhub.de [5.9.137.197]) (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 7F04C2F2D for ; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 16:33:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from zn.tnic (p5de8e9fe.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.232.233.254]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id 316F51EC06AC; Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:33:41 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1669653221; h=from:from: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:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=EkSu+bn5/ZdG6Mdy9WEl50uErDZt1Q23YH5+7wiGeAg=; b=DblfEotbkHNmwa2p8MaGT0cfAGRLMK+vW9sJd37I3B/E+hScXEcT3rlwTevGqgYvTw6YOk OS/2zXzpf0gG1G6P1TZSyLNhxqgSE2qY1ASAQ6JDdC6hnDVheJwoeDtZhMWDVfqQcJwrnq nCCI8Z2KkjwSaOGbQrxrcHjRo+6zFBg= Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 17:33:37 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Michael Kelley (LINUX)" Cc: "hpa@zytor.com" , KY Srinivasan , Haiyang Zhang , "wei.liu@kernel.org" , Dexuan Cui , "luto@kernel.org" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "edumazet@google.com" , "kuba@kernel.org" , "pabeni@redhat.com" , "lpieralisi@kernel.org" , "robh@kernel.org" , "kw@linux.com" , "bhelgaas@google.com" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "hch@infradead.org" , "m.szyprowski@samsung.com" , "robin.murphy@arm.com" , "thomas.lendacky@amd.com" , "brijesh.singh@amd.com" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" , Tianyu Lan , "kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com" , "sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com" , "ak@linux.intel.com" , "isaku.yamahata@intel.com" , "Williams, Dan J" , "jane.chu@oracle.com" , "seanjc@google.com" , "tony.luck@intel.com" , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , "iommu@lists.linux.dev" Subject: Re: [Patch v3 07/14] x86/hyperv: Change vTOM handling to use standard coco mechanisms Message-ID: References: <1668624097-14884-1-git-send-email-mikelley@microsoft.com> <1668624097-14884-8-git-send-email-mikelley@microsoft.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iommu@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 02:38:11PM +0000, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote: > Any further comment on this patch? I think we're agreement. For > this patch series I propose to change the symbol "CC_VENDOR_HYPERV" > to "CC_VENDOR_AMD_VTOM" and the function name > hyperv_cc_platform_has() to amd_vtom_cc_platform_has(). That doesn't sound optimal to me. So, let's clarify things first: those Isolation VMs - are they going to be the paravisors? I don't see any other option because the unmodified guest must be some old windoze.... So, if they're going to be that, then I guess this should be called CC_ATTR_PARAVISOR to denote that it is a thin layer of virt gunk between an unmodified guest and a hypervisor. And if TDX wants to do that too later, then they can use that flag too. Yes, no? -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette