linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 00/29] TDX Guest: TDX core support

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 16 Feb 2022 16:08:27 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "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

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022, Kai Huang wrote:
> 
> > > 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.

Yeah, it's inverted.  TDX is a built on top of VMX.  If/when we end up with stuff
that is relevant to VMX but not TDX, then we'll be referencing tdx/ for things
that that don't care at all about TDX.