lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 13:05:45 +1300 From: Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com> To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...el.com, luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, aarcange@...hat.com, ak@...ux.intel.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com, david@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, jgross@...e.com, jmattson@...gle.com, joro@...tes.org, jpoimboe@...hat.com, knsathya@...nel.org, pbonzini@...hat.com, sdeep@...are.com, tony.luck@...el.com, vkuznets@...hat.com, wanpengli@...cent.com, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com> Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 00/29] TDX Guest: TDX core support > > No objection to omitting "coco". Though what about using "vmx" and "svm" instead > > of "tdx" and "sev". > > I'm not dead-set on this but ... > > > We lose the more explicit tie to coco, but it would mirror the > > sub-directories in arch/x86/kvm/ > > ... having them too close in naming to the non-coco stuff, might cause > confusion when looking at: > > arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > > vs > > arch/x86/virt/vmx/vmx.c > > Instead of having > > arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > > and > > arch/x86/virt/tdx/vmx.c > > That second version differs just the right amount. :-) Having vmx.c under tdx/ directory looks a little bit strange. vmx.c seems more like "generic non-KVM host virtualization staff". > > > and would avoid a mess in the scenario where tdx > > or sev needs to share code with the non-coco side, e.g. I'm guessing TDX will need > > to do VMXON. > > > > arch/x86/virt/vmx/ > > tdx.c > > vmx.c > > > > arch/x86/virt/svm/ > > sev.c > > sev-es.c > > sev-snp.c > > svm.c > > That will probably be two files too: sev.c and svm.c > > But let's see what the other folks think first... > So if I catch you guys correctly, so far I am heading towards to: arch/x86/virt/vmx/ tdx.c ("vmx/" can be changed if you guys prefers others later). And I am targeting to use single tdx.c to hold ~2k LoC since looks like single file is preferred.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists