[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2c03ae77-640e-fc25-a65b-2416f090281d@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 11:38:55 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, Deep Shah <sdeep@...are.com>,
VMware Inc <pv-drivers@...are.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Peter H Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <knsathya@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 02/11] x86/tdx: Introduce INTEL_TDX_GUEST config
option
On 10/11/2021 11:19 AM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 10:37:38PM -0700, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
>> +config INTEL_TDX_GUEST
>> + bool "Intel Trusted Domain Extensions (TDX) Guest Support"
>> + depends on X86_64 && CPU_SUP_INTEL && PARAVIRT
>> + depends on SECURITY
>> + depends on X86_X2APIC
>> + help
>> + Provide support for running in a trusted domain on Intel processors
>> + equipped with Trusted Domain Extensions. TDX is a Intel technology
>> + that extends VMX and Memory Encryption with a new kind of virtual
>> + machine guest called Trust Domain (TD). A TD is designed to run in
>> + a CPU mode that protects the confidentiality of TD memory contents
>> + and the TD’s CPU state from other software, including VMM. TDX guest
>> + uses virtual X2APIC for interrupt management.
> Why does it depend on SECURITY? It should at least be explained in the
> commit message.
It can be dropped, it was only needed in an earlier version that used a LSM.
-Andi
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists