On 9/14/22 4:36 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 9/9/22 12:27, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c | 115 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/tdx.h | 56 ++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 171 insertions(+) create mode 100644 arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/tdx.h
The SEV equivalent of this in in:
drivers/virt/coco/sev-guest/sev-guest.c
right?
Why did you choose a different location? Also, can you please study the
When we initially submitted the attestation patches, virt/coco folder was not created. I initially kept this driver in platform/x86/, but later moved to arch/x86/coco based on the review comments in v4. There was a discussion about the need for a new config and the location of the driver. The outcome of that discussion is, since this is not a traditional driver, but a basic TDX feature, we don't need a special config and the code can be maintained in the arch/x86/coco folder.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YmEfgn7fMcZ2oCnr@zn.tnic/
SEV implementation a bit? It might help you find problems like the ioctl() return code issue. The SEV driver appears to have gotten that right.
Ok.