On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 08:04:43PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > * Brijesh Singh (brijesh.singh@xxxxxxx) wrote: > > > > > > On 2/1/18 11:58 AM, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > * Brijesh Singh (brijesh.singh@xxxxxxx) wrote: > > >> update 'info kvm' to display the memory encryption support. > > >> > > >> (qemu) info kvm > > >> kvm support: enabled > > >> memory encryption: disabled > > > As Markus said, this should be split qmp/hmp; but something else to > > > think about is whether this is a boolean or needs to be an enum; do > > > you have one version of encryption or are we going to need to flag up > > > versions or the features of the encryption? > > > > In future I could see us providing encrypted state status when we > > implement SEV-ES support, something like > > > > (qemu) info kvm > > kvm support: enabled > > memory encryption: enabled > > cpu register state: encrypted > > > > but so far I do not see need to provide the version string. If user > > wants to know the SEV version then it can open /dev/sev device to get > > platform status and more. > > Yes, I was worried a bit more about how general that was going to be > or whether we're collecting a lot of architecture specific fields here. > So I wondered, if it was an enum, whether that would be come: > > memory encryption: none > > memory encryption: SEV > > memory encryption: SEV-ES > > (I'm not too sure whether that's better or not, just a suggestion) I wonder if it is is even appropriate to have under 'info kvm', since 'info kvm' is architecture independant and SEV is specific to AMD x86_64 only. It might suggest an 'info sev' command is better ? Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
