From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6766613DDC1 for ; Mon, 6 May 2024 15:20:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715008834; cv=none; b=HPgkCvq4n+HMzcjLUke3I6+Ss6A+Mpsmbbjq1jRIRbBecfRnD3rBnlxMxDuSA26A2zTpv1jDmCY3E9/UxlzUFvmlgusqMYXrfxP8GWf/OgtOcgXYojlUKeUvzP/U7Y1517BKB//2MARnJeFwL0TN02T7vnMqsHdqMhHMKttMR5s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715008834; c=relaxed/simple; bh=omt7yE5xB59LEnIUYaGCpOR6jaRqEtKOc+2HvAGWA1w=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YGEtPc6pB15eLpLH/HFOTcgveRBAU8mCUGQrUII26WIjFwVQVIEoBYOaKkCelcvSNPvGz8m24JKzoXvFHzFDvDCAZuG4gCkQ6LW7YyP9iWbLICWSnDpQ0mCywnJ4DoJzXunhFaSshd2El4ixd2xH3kjRAhoUvSAWHBuLXD3ZVro= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=I5pOmVyJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="I5pOmVyJ" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1715008833; x=1746544833; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=omt7yE5xB59LEnIUYaGCpOR6jaRqEtKOc+2HvAGWA1w=; b=I5pOmVyJC1Nhl/SQIaJRksWoATLnXMQyA2YUyUK3JtIenKMTVy9iVqgj Sqxc7kRBsXqJiJ7hX+7md09XEammvKg0DIpdTto6MExVP8mQR+sQnHc4N GxU2xhJM0+Y2PB0c5e9Rc0DfelAPDZlcO6EBHC6oW4kcHvsLdUmkyqpBv F4xdmE+tFFXVTOP4o0AcRPrf8q+rb6c54muro2k27/T5ocXT6d1ga5F9h dUysfY16qeCfiGG2l7pAjqjuqQ6r+u7RkDfu+0VJYI/XJ+z2wbStZ9PZG qkRjkoYJ1dqHZYnsxFU11bXqUP++AlHU/E4Q/740f0B43iR4/z1xS3UHI w==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: gPfQrfBWS4i02V1PtOWN3w== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 5vPYrvAyRhalY482uQZR6g== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11065"; a="10914505" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,258,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="10914505" Received: from fmviesa002.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.142]) by orvoesa110.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 May 2024 08:20:32 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: TTC0y8iOSo2wfFdVMjPRtQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: Wb1HwRg0SPuoi5+0uFZSww== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.07,258,1708416000"; d="scan'208";a="51379330" Received: from yilunxu-optiplex-7050.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.159.165]) by fmviesa002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 May 2024 08:20:30 -0700 Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 23:14:51 +0800 From: Xu Yilun To: Dan Williams Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy , linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, Wu Hao , Yilun Xu , Lukas Wunner , Samuel Ortiz , Bjorn Helgaas , kevin.tian@intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 5/6] PCI/TSM: Authenticate devices via platform TSM Message-ID: References: <171291190324.3532867.13480405752065082171.stgit@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com> <171291193308.3532867.129739584130889725.stgit@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com> <662c69eb6dbf1_b6e0294d1@dwillia2-mobl3.amr.corp.intel.com.notmuch> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <662c69eb6dbf1_b6e0294d1@dwillia2-mobl3.amr.corp.intel.com.notmuch> > > If (!ide_cap && tee_cap), we get here but doing the below does not make > > sense for TEE (which are likely to be VFs). > > The "!ide_cap && tee_cap" case may also be the "TSM wants to setup IDE > without TDISP flow". IIUC, should be "TSM wants to setup TDISP without IDE flow"? But I think aik is talking about VFs (which fit "!ide_cap && tee_cap"), VFs should not be rejected by the following: pci_tsm->doe_mb = pci_find_doe_mailbox(pdev, PCI_VENDOR_ID_PCI_SIG, PCI_DOE_PROTO_CMA); if (!pci_tsm->doe_mb) return; VF should check its PF's doe/ide/tee cap and then be added to pci_tsm_devs, is it? Thanks, Yilun