From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DCCBC4360C for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 03:37:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AFB92388E for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2021 03:37:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727428AbhAUDhm (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 22:37:42 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:25788 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2392977AbhAUByL (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2021 20:54:11 -0500 IronPort-SDR: IpbVMVmTta/bS/MJJ6WXIGaYobBnvyAwuCQ60t0ZdPSK/iuhKFzp/2NgxIpALuUjQIfVjlDUcL GWmoH7CyMx/Q== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9870"; a="175698492" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,362,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="175698492" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Jan 2021 17:53:29 -0800 IronPort-SDR: YTuSdqf7JTVPfMOaHl07geipP4qj462+JdHXha35om2ISImZS/FHUNMcsP+MenbKAZO2FEHk51 H9KjtxXa/FvQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,362,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="427115555" Received: from gapoveda-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO khuang2-desk.gar.corp.intel.com) ([10.254.79.186]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Jan 2021 17:53:25 -0800 Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 14:53:23 +1300 From: Kai Huang To: Dave Hansen Cc: Sean Christopherson , , , , , , , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 06/26] x86/cpu/intel: Allow SGX virtualization without Launch Control support Message-Id: <20210121145323.0caad8f1d1970214bba905b1@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <626d0157-c0a0-60fd-813f-af3207ad91df@intel.com> References: <666e0995-cf08-1ed9-20b2-f64d1ce64c20@intel.com> <20210121124830.3cb323c5ead91800645c912a@intel.com> <626d0157-c0a0-60fd-813f-af3207ad91df@intel.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 20 Jan 2021 15:51:44 -0800 Dave Hansen wrote: > On 1/20/21 3:48 PM, Kai Huang wrote: > >> Not a big deal either way. I agree that "virt" can be confusing. > >> > >> Considering that: > >> > >> +config X86_SGX_VIRTUALIZATION > >> + depends on ... KVM_INTEL > > It is already in patch 3: Introduce virtual EPC for use by KVM guests: > > > > +config X86_SGX_VIRTUALIZATION > > + bool "Software Guard eXtensions (SGX) Virtualization" > > + depends on X86_SGX && KVM_INTEL > > Right, I'm suggesting that patch 3 should call it: > > X86_SGX_KVM > > instead of: > > X86_SGX_VIRTUALIZATION In case we want to change to X86_SGX_KVM, is it more reasonable to put it to arch/x86/kvm/Kconfig (maybe change to X86_KVM_SGX)? Jarkko also mentioned X86_SGX_VEPC, in which case still putting it to arch/x86/Kconfig looks a better fit. Sean, Paolo, Do you have comment here?