From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47073) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cxWEW-0007zW-FJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 06:07:41 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cxWES-0004b5-Gx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 06:07:40 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-x22f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22f]:35336) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cxWES-0004aV-9e for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 06:07:36 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id r16so35135664ioi.2 for ; Mon, 10 Apr 2017 03:07:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1491818850.10884.99.camel@intel.com> From: Patrick Ohly Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 12:07:30 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <1491575431-32170-1-git-send-email-amarnath.valluri@intel.com> <1491575431-32170-10-git-send-email-amarnath.valluri@intel.com> <20170407144100.GL26896@redhat.com> <094e28c1-b780-f8ff-fc6a-9f6dd3421a3a@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 9/9] tpm: Added support for TPM emulator List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Marc-Andr=E9?= Lureau Cc: Amarnath Valluri , "Daniel P. Berrange" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com On Mon, 2017-04-10 at 09:54 +0000, Marc-André Lureau wrote: > By "public protocol", I mean qemu communication with a foreign > project, swtpm or other. > > If qemu grows new needs, or if the protocol is found limited or buggy, > it may change. Subtle interactions may break between various > implementations. The minimum would be some versioning or > capabilities. A document describing the states and messages > allowed/denied & effects would be quite necessary. Stefan, is there any documentation besides the source? Just asking, I don't think it is needed because... > Otoh, there doesn't seem to be other users of this protocol, or other > implementations. So it may make sense to make it qemu-specific, and > thus "private": the protocol and implementation can evolve without > risk to break other users. This gives us a lot more flexibility and > control, and doesn't have to be very strictly documented (although it > is still better to be strict, but requires more effort). ... I suspect it falls into this camp. I can't think of any users of the protocol besides swtpm itself and now qemu. Stefan, is that correct? -- Best Regards, Patrick Ohly The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak on behalf of Intel on this matter.