Re: [PATCH RFC 14/20] attestation: Add the base family specification and generated files

[Jiri Pirko]

Wed, Nov 04, 2026 at 06:54:36PM +0100, jgg@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>On Fri, Oct 30, 2026 at 04:05:13PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Oct 26, 2026 at 03:07:54PM +0100, jgg@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> 
>> [..]
>> 
>> >> +
>> >> +/* attrs of group cap */
>> >> +#define _CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP(_attr) \
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR(CTLV_ATTESTATION_GROUP_CAP, _CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_##_attr)
>> >> +
>> >> +enum _ctlv_attestation_attr_cap {
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_EVIDENCE = 1,
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_MR,
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_MIN_CHALLENGE_LENGTH,
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_MAX_CHALLENGE_LENGTH,
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_MAX_TOTAL_OUTPUT_LENGTH,
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_MR_FLAGS,
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_OBJECT,
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_BLOB_CLASS,
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_FORMAT,
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_REPRESENTATION,
>> >> +	_CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_MAX_LENGTH,
>> >> +};
>> >> +
>> >> +#define CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_EVIDENCE _CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP(EVIDENCE)
>> >
>> >I feel like there are too many layers here for a code generator..
>> >
>> >enum ctvl_attestation_attributes {
>> >   CTLV_ATTESTATION_ATTR_CAP_EVIDENCE = CTLV_ATTR(CTLV_FAMILY_ATTESTATION, 2, 1),
>> >}
>> >
>> >Do the intermediate constants add anything?
>> 
>> True. I originally had it like you suggest, I changed to enums to avoid
>> the explicit numbers. But you are right, does not add anything.
>> Changed back.
>
>I was also thinking that having the explicit numbers makes it more
>robust if someone does backport. We should try to have everything
>explicitly numbered in these generated files to prevent subtle errors
>like that.

Okay.