On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 07:51:04AM -0700,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023, isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> > index aa7a56a47564..32883e520b00 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h
> > @@ -562,6 +562,39 @@ struct kvm_pmu_event_filter {
> > /* x86-specific KVM_EXIT_HYPERCALL flags. */
> > #define KVM_EXIT_HYPERCALL_LONG_MODE BIT(0)
> >
> > +struct kvm_mem_enc_cmd {
> > + /* sub-command id of KVM_MEM_ENC_OP. */
> > + __u32 id;
> > + /*
> > + * Auxiliary flags for sub-command. If sub-command doesn't use it,
> > + * set zero.
> > + */
> > + __u32 flags;
> > + /*
> > + * Data for sub-command. An immediate or a pointer to the actual
> > + * data in process virtual address. If sub-command doesn't use it,
> > + * set zero.
> > + */
> > + __u64 data;
> > + /*
> > + * Supplemental error code in the case of error.
> > + * SEV error code from the PSP or TDX SEAMCALL status code.
> > + * The caller should set zero.
> > + */
> > + union {
> > + struct {
> > + __u32 error;
> > + /*
> > + * KVM_SEV_LAUNCH_START and KVM_SEV_RECEIVE_START
> > + * require extra data. Not included in struct
> > + * kvm_sev_launch_start or struct kvm_sev_receive_start.
> > + */
> > + __u32 sev_fd;
> > + };
> > + __u64 error64;
> > + };
> > +};
>
> Eww. Why not just use an entirely different struct for TDX? I don't see what
> benefit this provides other than a warm fuzzy feeling that TDX and SEV share a
> struct. Practically speaking, KVM will likely take on more work to forcefully
> smush the two together than if they're separate things.
Ok, let's drop this patch. Keep the ABI different for now.
--
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx>
