Re: [PATCHv8 00/30] TDX Guest: TDX core support

From: Kirill A. Shutemov
Date: Fri Apr 08 2022 - 07:02:42 EST

Next message: kernel test robot: "[l1k:smsc95xx_5.17 423/887] drivers/regulator/rpi-panel-attiny-regulator.c:357:19: error: 'struct gpio_chip' has no member named 'of_node'; did you mean 'fwnode'?"
Previous message: Mikhail Gavrilov: "Re: [Bug][5.18-rc0] Between commits ed4643521e6a and 34af78c4e616, appears warning "WARNING: CPU: 31 PID: 51848 at drivers/dma-buf/dma-fence-array.c:191 dma_fence_array_create+0x101/0x120" and some games stopped working."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 06:53:04PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2022, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 07, 2022 at 04:50:46PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 07, 2022, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > > It would also be really nice to get some SEV folks on the list as
> > > > well. I suspect the coco/ directory will grow more common SEV/TDX
> > > > code over time.
> > > >
> > > > X86 CONFIDENTIAL COMPUTING
> > > > M: x86@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > > R: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ...
> > > > S: Supported
> > > > F: arch/x86/coco/
> > > > ...
> > >
> > > And/or a dedicated vger list?
> >
> > We already have linux-coco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. Although, it is not
> > x86-specific.
>
> Is it ok to spam that list with TDX/SNP stuff, or would it be better to create
> something x86-specific?

In this case the existing coco mailing list will have little to none use
as most of coco traffic is x86-specific at the moment. We can split off
x86-specific later if needed.

--
Kirill A. Shutemov