On Wed, Oct 09, 2024 at 01:22:16PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Oct 09, 2024 at 02:03:48PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > I would rather convert these three attributes to synthetic X86_FEATUREs > > next to X86_FEATURE_TDX_GUEST. I suggested it once. > > And back then I answered that splitting the coco checks between a X86_FEATURE > and a cc_platform ones is confusing. Which ones do I use, X86_FEATURE or > cc_platform? > > Oh, for SNP or TDX I use cpu_feature_enabled() but in generic code I use > cc_platform. > > Sounds confusing to me. If you use SNP or TDX check in generic code something is wrong. Abstraction is broken somewhere. Generic code doesn't need to know concrete implementation. -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
