[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <58911901bd7b4bc3a99642214106bc2f@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2021 08:43:55 +0000
From: "Wang, Wei W" <wei.w.wang@...el.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
CC: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
"sgarzare@...hat.com" <sgarzare@...hat.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"kys@...rosoft.com" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@...el.com>,
"Kleen, Andi" <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
"srutherford@...gle.com" <srutherford@...gle.com>,
"erdemaktas@...gle.com" <erdemaktas@...gle.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC] hypercall-vsock: add a new vsock transport
On Thursday, November 25, 2021 2:38 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> > We thought about virtio-mmio. There are some barriers:
> > 1) It wasn't originally intended for x86 machines. The only machine
> > type in QEMU that supports it (to run on x86) is microvm. But
> > "microvm" doesn’t support TDX currently, and adding this support might
> need larger effort.
>
> Can you explain why microvm needs larger effort? It looks to me it fits for TDX
> perfectly since it has less attack surface.
The main thing is TDVF doesn’t support microvm so far (the based OVMF
support for microvm is still under their community discussion).
Do you guys think it is possible to add virtio-mmio support for q35?
(e.g. create a special platform bus in some fashion for memory mapped devices)
Not sure if the effort would be larger.
Thanks,
Wei
Powered by blists - more mailing lists