linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] x86/virt/tdx: Print TDX module basic information

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]

Message-ID: <ab89f15ab0497e4d609a5cd843a3e64e736def14.camel@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2024 12:48:04 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com"
	<seanjc@...gle.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "peterz@...radead.org"
	<peterz@...radead.org>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>, "mingo@...hat.com"
	<mingo@...hat.com>, "kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com"
	<kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, "Williams, Dan J"
	<dan.j.williams@...el.com>, "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org"
	<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Gao, Chao"
	<chao.gao@...el.com>, "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com"
	<binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] x86/virt/tdx: Print TDX module basic information


> > >  struct tdx_sysinfo {
> > > -	struct tdx_sysinfo_tdmr_info tdmr_info;
> > > +	struct tdx_sysinfo_module_info		module_info;
> > > +	struct tdx_sysinfo_module_version	module_version;
> > > +	struct tdx_sysinfo_tdmr_info		tdmr_info;
> > 
> > Compare that to:
> > 
> >         struct tdx_sys_info {
> >                 struct tdx_sys_info_features features;
> >                 struct tdx_sys_info_version version;
> >                 struct tdx_sys_info_tdmr tdmr;
> >         };
> > 
> > ...and tell me which oine is easier to read.
> 
> I agree this is easier to read if we don't look at the JSON file.  On the
> other hand, following JSON file's "Class" names IMHO we can more easily
> find which class to look at for a given member.
> 
> So I think they both have pros/cons, and I have no hard opinion on this.
> 

Hi Dan,

Btw, if we aim (either now or eventually) to auto generate all metadata
fields based on JSON file, I think it would be easier to name the
structures based on the "Class" names.  Otherwise we will need to do some
class-specific tweaks.