Hi Jiewen,
I agree using CC as in (EFI_CC_MEASUREMENT_PROTOCOL) would be much clearer.
Regards,
Sami Mujawar
On 29/10/2021, 01:17, "Yao, Jiewen" <jiewen....@intel.com> wrote:
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 (#82999): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/82999
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]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
