I am OK to use EFI_CC_MEASUREMENT_PROTOCOL to replace EFI_TEE_MEASUREMENT_PROTOCOL. (much better than COCO)
Samy What do you think? > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lenda...@amd.com> > Sent: Friday, October 29, 2021 2:29 AM > To: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen....@intel.com>; Brijesh Singh > <brijesh.si...@amd.com>; kra...@redhat.com; Xu, Min M > <min.m...@intel.com> > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; Erdem Aktas <erdemak...@google.com>; James > Bottomley <j...@linux.ibm.com>; Dong, Eric <eric.d...@intel.com>; Ni, Ray > <ray...@intel.com>; Kumar, Rahul1 <rahul1.ku...@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH V2 12/28] UefiCpuPkg/CpuExceptionHandler: > Add base support for the #VE exception > > On 10/28/21 10:52 AM, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > > Thanks Brijesh. > > > > We can merge SNP patches at first, then decide next step. Not a problem. > > > > TEE is just my initial thought. And I am open to change if we have a better > name. > > > > We already have EFI_TEE_MEASUREMENT_PROTOCOL. I did not see your > feedback on that. So I assume you agree with that. > > > > If you have different idea, please feedback to this patch. I hope we have > > one > name. > > > > COCO seems weird to me, btw. :( > > Like Brijesh, I worry about confusion with the ARM TEE feature. Maybe just > CC then? > > Thanks, > Tom > > > > > Thank you > > Yao Jiewen > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.si...@amd.com> > >> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2021 11:35 PM > >> To: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen....@intel.com>; kra...@redhat.com; Xu, Min M > >> <min.m...@intel.com> > >> Cc: brijesh.si...@amd.com; devel@edk2.groups.io; Erdem Aktas > >> <erdemak...@google.com>; James Bottomley <j...@linux.ibm.com>; Tom > >> Lendacky <thomas.lenda...@amd.com>; Dong, Eric <eric.d...@intel.com>; > Ni, > >> Ray <ray...@intel.com>; Kumar, Rahul1 <rahul1.ku...@intel.com> > >> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH V2 12/28] > UefiCpuPkg/CpuExceptionHandler: > >> Add base support for the #VE exception > >> > >> > >> > >> On 10/27/21 8:59 PM, Yao, Jiewen wrote: > >>> Hi Gerd > >>> I tend to agree with you on the direction to use one TEE specific > >>> Exception > lib. > >>> > >>> However, I have naming concern. > >>> The VMG is very SEV specific term. I don't believe it is a right name to > >>> cover > >> the TEE exception lib. > >>> > >>> If Brijesh agree to merge, I think we should rename it to a neutral name, > such > >> as TeeExitLib. > >>> > >>> What do you think, Brijesh? > >> > >> I am good with merging both the TDX and SEV feature into one library but > >> I am not sure about the "TEE" name in it. TEE generally is used on the > >> ARM. In Linux kernel and everywhere else we have been using the COCO > >> (Confidential Computing), so something along that line makes much more > >> sense. > >> > >> We can rename the library after the SNP patches are merged. I would > >> prefer to avoid renaming because all of the SNP patches are Ack-ed. > >> > >> -Brijesh > >>> > >>> Thank you > >>> Yao Jiewen > >>> > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: kra...@redhat.com <kra...@redhat.com> > >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2021 3:20 PM > >>>> To: Xu, Min M <min.m...@intel.com> > >>>> Cc: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.si...@amd.com>; Yao, Jiewen > >>>> <jiewen....@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io; Erdem Aktas > >>>> <erdemak...@google.com>; James Bottomley <j...@linux.ibm.com>; > Tom > >>>> Lendacky <thomas.lenda...@amd.com>; Dong, Eric > <eric.d...@intel.com>; > >> Ni, > >>>> Ray <ray...@intel.com>; Kumar, Rahul1 <rahul1.ku...@intel.com> > >>>> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH V2 12/28] > >> UefiCpuPkg/CpuExceptionHandler: > >>>> Add base support for the #VE exception > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>>>> How about adding the tdx exception handler to the existing library, so > we > >>>> don't > >>>>>> have the churn of adding a new library everywhere *again*? > >>>> > >>>>> Do you mean add the VmTdExitVeHandler.c/VmTdExitLibNull.c in > >>>> CpuExceptionHandlerLib, then include the corresponding source file in > each > >>>> *CpuExceptionHandlerLib.inf? > >>>> > >>>> No, I mean extend the existing VmgExitLib instead of adding a new > >>>> VmTdExitLib, i.e. place the tdx handler in > >>>> OvmfPkg/Library/VmgExitLib/TdxExitHandler.c > >>>> > >>>> take care, > >>>> Gerd > >>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#82874): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/82874 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/86085742/21656 Mute #ve:https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/mutehashtag/ve Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
