Message ID | 20250228170720.144739-1-sgarzare@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | Enlightened vTPM support for SVSM on SEV-SNP | expand |
On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 06:07:14PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > I put RFC back in because we haven't yet decided if this is the best > approach to support SVSM vTPM, but I really like to receive feedbacks > especially from the maintainer/reviewers of the TPM subsystem, to see if > this approach is acceptable. I didn't look in high detail, but the overall shape is what I was thinking about in our previous conversations. Very little TPM code is under arch/, we have a nice simplifying helper in the core code, and you have a tidy platform device to tie it all together. Jason
On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 08:30:09PM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: >On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 06:07:14PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >> I put RFC back in because we haven't yet decided if this is the best >> approach to support SVSM vTPM, but I really like to receive feedbacks >> especially from the maintainer/reviewers of the TPM subsystem, to see if >> this approach is acceptable. > >I didn't look in high detail, but the overall shape is what I was >thinking about in our previous conversations. Very little TPM code is >under arch/, we have a nice simplifying helper in the core code, and >you have a tidy platform device to tie it all together. Thank you so much for taking a look and confirming that I understood your suggestions correctly! Stefano