[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <30220ec4-d35f-4a8a-4c08-959765ea6f26@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 14:24:33 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...il.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>,
Wander Lairson Costa <wander@...hat.com>,
marcelo.cerri@...onical.com, tim.gardner@...onical.com,
khalid.elmously@...onical.com, philip.cox@...onical.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/5] x86/tdx: Add Quote generation support
On 7/22/22 14:18, Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy wrote:
> For cases where your platform does not want to support or enable the generic
> interface (like vsock), isn't it better to have a fallback approach? I am not
> saying we should have such an ABI for all cases. But attestation is a must-have
> feature for the TDX guest, and we want to support it in all TD guest platforms.
> I think the GHCI ABI is added to meet this requirement.
This logic is basically: it's in the spec so it must be useful. I don't
buy that, sorry.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists