[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d013807c-3b5c-4bb6-6fc9-b7dd9d27c1b2@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2021 11:18:17 -0700
From: "Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan"
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Raj Ashok <ashok.raj@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] x86/tdx: Add __tdcall() and __tdvmcall() helper
functions
On 4/23/21 8:15 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Has Intel "officially" switched to "tdg" as the acronym for TDX guest? As much
> as I dislike having to juggle "TDX host" vs "TDX guest" concepts, tdx_ vs tdg_
> isn't any better IMO.
When we merged both host and guest kernel into the same code base, we hit some
name conflicts (due to using tdx_ prefix in both host/guest code). So in order to
avoid such issues in future we decided to go with tdg/tdh combination. we thought
its good enough for kernel function/variable names.
The latter looks an awful lot like a typo, grepping for
> "tdx" to find relevant code will get fail (sometimes), and confusion seems
> inevitable as keeping "TDX" out of guest code/comments/documentation will be
> nigh impossible.
tdg/tdh combination is only used within kernel code. But in sections which are
visible to users (kernel config and command line option), we still use
tdx_guest/tdx_host combination.
>
> If we do decide to go with "tdg" for the guest stuff, then_all_ of the guest
> stuff, file names included, should use tdg. Maybe X86_FEATURE_TDX_GUEST could
> be left as a breadcrumb for translating TDX->TDG.
--
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux Kernel Developer
Powered by blists - more mailing lists