From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.648.1624494958643327792 for ; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 17:35:58 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=oU5Qdr6Q; spf=pass (domain: linux.ibm.com, ip: 148.163.156.1, mailfrom: jejb@linux.ibm.com) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 15O0Y5Rh066666; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 20:35:56 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : subject : from : reply-to : to : cc : date : in-reply-to : references : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=WmtAYb+jgX8H8Xh1txicOUEJIxVYJN6U9P3Vz3jRiwE=; b=oU5Qdr6QWAjcDHoLVJoduIU8uBX8kqXxhc70Zi+QouaqDB4PySz5UAwMxvOVvE+Wr4vJ djOXmxGD8fpTWpCKTGtU8ht/viCntyZ/pqoGNFpeQDJPAoLfQMn8+4q7DVAw2rKdt40U WGgYYiBxXQihUyPSc0JRvCt7s2xNJjbXYUSS98wkst/C2JFProyNxX62mCHJ/aAC7HHr rFoP2sI19jXXaW8MZkJ0UlDt2qwyjB+IXxquLbVGS3dOZtZMMGgZvLhK2WvvcKUWOZ9r jB32Na3YSF6rFuWyq3MpKenpLJoljF85g3F5VL2InIZqKhfWT7g31AWC3TlsT3yQfOka lA== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 39ce5aj2re-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 23 Jun 2021 20:35:56 -0400 Received: from m0098399.ppops.net (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 15O0Z2Jo071386; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 20:35:56 -0400 Received: from ppma02dal.us.ibm.com (a.bd.3ea9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.62.189.10]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 39ce5aj2r2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 23 Jun 2021 20:35:55 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma02dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma02dal.us.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 15O0XlR8011531; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 00:35:54 GMT Received: from b03cxnp08026.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp08026.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.18]) by ppma02dal.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 39987a5q7v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 24 Jun 2021 00:35:54 +0000 Received: from b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.235]) by b03cxnp08026.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 15O0Zr8Q28639612 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 24 Jun 2021 00:35:53 GMT Received: from b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76FE378060; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 00:35:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B21D7805C; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 00:35:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from jarvis.int.hansenpartnership.com (unknown [9.85.129.14]) by b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 00:35:49 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <5ea5e5a29e42e4c6811b81975163d82a228e1c82.camel@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [edk2-rfc] [edk2-devel] RFC: design review for TDVF in OVMF From: "James Bottomley" Reply-To: jejb@linux.ibm.com To: devel@edk2.groups.io, min.m.xu@intel.com, "lersek@redhat.com" , "Yao, Jiewen" , "rfc@edk2.groups.io" Cc: Brijesh Singh , Tom Lendacky , "erdemaktas@google.com" , "cho@microsoft.com" , "bret.barkelew@microsoft.com" , Jon Lange , Karen Noel , Paolo Bonzini , Nathaniel McCallum , "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" , "Ademar de Souza Reis Jr." Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 17:35:48 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: <168759329436FBCF.5845@groups.io> <4d0fc023-6520-43f6-0b0e-9db7bf15a85c@redhat.com> <41a0be8f-4f8e-a62f-ea63-665c1cafd877@redhat.com> User-Agent: Evolution 3.34.4 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: 319GO9z3kMEnBYwss2mYAsXqjX4bbess X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: vi1GWse2SqA4v0I7fJgcDGE2HIzgy9ME X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391,18.0.790 definitions=2021-06-23_14:2021-06-23,2021-06-23 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104190000 definitions=main-2106240001 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 2021-06-24 at 00:24 +0000, Min Xu wrote: > On 06/22/2021 9:39 PM, Laszlo wrote: > > I should clarify: the relevant part of my preference is not that > > "IntelTdx.dsc" > > contain the *complete* TDVF feature set. The relevant part (for me) > > is that > > "OvmfPkgX64.dsc" *not* be over-complicated for the sake of TDX, > > even > > considering only the "basic" TDVF feature set. It's fine to > > implement TDX in two > > stages ("basic" and "complete"); my point is that even "basic" > > should not over- > > complicate "OvmfPkgX64.dsc". > > > Thanks much for the comments and we don't want to make OvmfPkgX64.dsc > over-complicated either. > We have updated the design slides to V0.95 and Slides 6-15 are > discussing the > Config-A and Config-B. > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/files/Designs/2021/0611/TDVF_Design_Review%28v0.95%29.pptx > Your comment is always welcome! The mailing list still won't give me that file, can you update it in the bugzilla: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3429 As well, please? Thanks, James