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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA102C433EF for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 12:05:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1357258AbiBUMF5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Feb 2022 07:05:57 -0500 Received: from mxb-00190b01.gslb.pphosted.com ([23.128.96.19]:37144 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1357241AbiBUMFs (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Feb 2022 07:05:48 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de (mail.skyhub.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:190:11c2::b:1457]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42D00201A7; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 04:05:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from zn.tnic (dslb-088-067-221-104.088.067.pools.vodafone-ip.de [88.67.221.104]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id A9FD41EC01A9; Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:05:19 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1645445119; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=G8yP8d3UkjcXD9ochKrIpwMp/vR+RVz3kP09JYxfJtE=; b=UQtOjBpObJD/bt7L3zvjvwkh0kLrD6l+caudCh4+dNXI2/g+LicZs+AJ4DbKLLTJYlqibY kkoTuMYT+u94uOIxxjkSQeo8fYov429fwf3aFvQtraA8WRz4Es1ZwN+PZYwVNStlHv/q+S gBpXi/WYdHPMxkbih3ICruVP/1h1OCs= Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:05:27 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , aarcange@redhat.com, ak@linux.intel.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, dave.hansen@intel.com, david@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, jgross@suse.com, jmattson@google.com, joro@8bytes.org, jpoimboe@redhat.com, knsathya@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, luto@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com, sdeep@vmware.com, seanjc@google.com, tglx@linutronix.de, tony.luck@intel.com, vkuznets@redhat.com, wanpengli@tencent.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, Brijesh Singh , Tom Lendacky , Tianyu Lan Subject: Re: [PATCHv3.1 2/32] x86/coco: Explicitly declare type of confidential computing platform Message-ID: References: <20220219001305.22883-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20220221114451.mljggcmadgvrrxbv@black.fi.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220221114451.mljggcmadgvrrxbv@black.fi.intel.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 02:44:51PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > Hm. Isn't 'vendor' too generic? It may lead to name conflict in the > future. It's a static variable visible only in this unit. > What is wrong with cc_vendor here? I noticed that you don't like name of > a variable to match type name. Why? Because when I look at the name I don't know whether it is the type or a variable of that type. Sure, sure, it depends on the context but let's make it as non-ambiguous as possible. > Currently cc_platform_has() relies on hv_is_isolation_supported() which > checks for !HV_ISOLATION_TYPE_NONE. This is direct transfer to the new > scheme. It might be wrong, but it is not regression. I didn't say it is a regression - I'm just wondering why. Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette