Re: [PATCH v8 01/40] x86/compressed/64: detect/setup SEV/SME features earlier in boot

Brijesh Singh
2022-01-10T20:46:37Z

Hi Venu,

On 1/5/22 1:34 PM, Brijesh Singh wrote:
>
>
> On 1/3/22 1:10 PM, Venu Busireddy wrote:
>> On 2021-12-15 15:22:57 -0600, Michael Roth wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 09:38:55PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But it is hard to discuss anything without patches so we can continue
>>>> the topic with concrete patches. But this unification is not
>>>> super-pressing so it can go ontop of the SNP pile.
>>>
>>> Yah, it's all theoretical at this point. Didn't mean to derail things
>>> though. I mainly brought it up to suggest that Venu's original
>>> approach of
>>> returning the encryption bit via a pointer argument might make it
>>> easier to
>>> expand it for other purposes in the future, and that naming it for that
>>> future purpose might encourage future developers to focus their efforts
>>> there instead of potentially re-introducing duplicate code.
>>>
>>> But either way it's simple enough to rework things when we actually
>>> cross that bridge. So totally fine with saving all of this as a future
>>> follow-up, or picking up either of Venu's patches for now if you'd still
>>> prefer.
>>
>> So, what is the consensus? Do you want me to submit a patch after the
>> SNP changes go upstream? Or, do you want to roll in one of the patches
>> that I posted earlier?
>>
>
> Will incorporate your changes in v9. And will see what others say about it.
>

Now that I am incorporating the feedback in my wip branch, at this time
I am dropping your cleanup mainly because some of recommendation may
require more rework down the line; you can submit your recommendation as
cleanup after the patches are in. I hope this is okay with you.

thanks