public inbox for devel@edk2.groups.io
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Yao, Jiewen" <jiewen.yao@intel.com>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: "Xu, Min M" <min.m.xu@intel.com>,
	Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>,
	"devel@edk2.groups.io" <devel@edk2.groups.io>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+tianocore@kernel.org>,
	"Justen, Jordan L" <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>,
	Erdem Aktas <erdemaktas@google.com>,
	James Bottomley <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
	Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH V7 1/1] OvmfPkg: Enable TDX in ResetVector
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 07:36:10 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <SJ0PR11MB4894298E75BDC15EEC791B958CA49@SJ0PR11MB4894.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210924053713.fy4ulz3ykbs4xqka@sirius.home.kraxel.org>

That is my question.
AMD has its own extension. TDX has its own extension.
Why we have to unify the firmware binary, and to make both us unconfirmable?
Or do we want to unify ARM/AARch64/RISC-V ?

I agree we can unify as much as possible.
But due to hardware difference i don't think we achieve 100% unifying. 

Thank you
Yao Jiewen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 1:37 PM
> To: Yao, Jiewen <jiewen.yao@intel.com>
> Cc: Xu, Min M <min.m.xu@intel.com>; Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@amd.com>;
> devel@edk2.groups.io; Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+tianocore@kernel.org>; Justen,
> Jordan L <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>; Erdem Aktas <erdemaktas@google.com>;
> James Bottomley <jejb@linux.ibm.com>; Tom Lendacky
> <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH V7 1/1] OvmfPkg: Enable TDX in ResetVector
> 
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 02:19:17PM +0000, Yao, Jiewen wrote:
> > All fields in TDX metadata are required. So the current SEV proposal
> > (3 fields) does not work for TDX. The extra fields are used to guide
> > VMM on how to copy the binary, allocate memory,
> 
> --verbose please.
> 
> The VMM loads the firmware just fine today without that metadata because
> it's defined by the x86 architecture how to the firmware must be loaded.
> 
> And note that we are discussing an unified normal/sev/tdx firmware
> binary here, so the "we might do something completely different for
> tdx in the future" argument isn't very convincing here.
> 
> take care,
>   Gerd


  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-24  7:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-21  9:05 [PATCH V7 0/1] Add Intel TDX support in OvmfPkg/ResetVector Min Xu
2021-09-21  9:05 ` [PATCH V7 1/1] OvmfPkg: Enable TDX in ResetVector Min Xu
2021-09-22  7:49   ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-23  0:38     ` Min Xu
2021-09-23  8:48       ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-23 11:39         ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-23 12:54           ` Brijesh Singh
2021-09-23 13:18             ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-23 13:19             ` [edk2-devel] " Min Xu
2021-09-23 13:38               ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-23 14:03                 ` Brijesh Singh
2021-09-23 14:15                   ` Min Xu
2021-09-23 14:19                     ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-24  5:37                       ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-24  7:36                         ` Yao, Jiewen [this message]
2021-09-24  9:24                           ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-24  9:55                             ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-24  5:28                     ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-24  6:55                       ` Min Xu
2021-09-24 10:07                         ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-24 10:33                           ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-24 14:02                             ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-24 16:40                               ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-27  8:05                                 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-27 10:05                                   ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-27 14:59                                     ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-28  0:21                                       ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-24  7:32                       ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-24  9:15                         ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-24  4:54                 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-24  7:39                   ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-24  9:34                     ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-24 10:11                       ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-24 10:38                         ` Brijesh Singh
2021-09-24 11:17                           ` Gerd Hoffmann
2021-09-24 11:29                             ` Brijesh Singh
2021-09-24 10:14                     ` Brijesh Singh
2021-09-24 10:58   ` Brijesh Singh
2021-09-25  0:03     ` Min Xu
2021-09-25  3:21       ` Brijesh Singh
2021-09-25 23:17         ` [edk2-devel] " Min Xu
2021-09-25 23:30           ` Yao, Jiewen
2021-09-27  8:44           ` Gerd Hoffmann

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-list from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=SJ0PR11MB4894298E75BDC15EEC791B958CA49@SJ0PR11MB4894.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox