On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 04:25:30PM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > On 9/11/2024 7:04 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 07:15:12PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 8/29/24 06:51, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > > nit: Since there are other similarly named functions that come later how > > > > > about rename this to init_kvm_tdx_caps, so that it's clear that the > > > > > functions that are executed ones are prefixed with "init_" and those that > > > > > will be executed on every TDV boot up can be named prefixed with "setup_" > > > > We can call setup_kvm_tdx_caps() from from tdx_get_kvm_supported_cpuid(), > > > > and drop the struct kvm_tdx_caps. So then the setup_kvm_tdx_caps() should > > > > be OK. > > > > > > I don't understand this suggestion since tdx_get_capabilities() also needs > > > kvm_tdx_caps. I think the code is okay as it is with just the rename that > > > Nik suggested (there are already some setup_*() functions in KVM but for > > > example setup_vmcs_config() is called from hardware_setup()). > > > > Oh sorry for the confusion, looks like I pasted the function names wrong > > way around above and left out where setup_kvm_tdx_caps() can be called > > from. > > > > I meant only tdx_get_capabilities() needs to call setup_kvm_tdx_caps(). > > And setup_kvm_tdx_caps() calls tdx_get_kvm_supported_cpuid(). > > > > The data in kvm_tdx_caps is only needed for tdx_get_capabilities(). It can > > be generated from the data already in td_conf. > > > > At least that's what it looks like to me, but maybe I'm missing something. > > kvm_tdx_caps is setup in __tdx_bringup() because it also serves the purpose > to validate the KVM's capabilities against the specific TDX module. If KVM > and TDX module are incompatible, it needs to fail the bring up of TDX in > KVM. It's too late to validate it when KVM_TDX_CAPABILITIES issued. E.g., > if the TDX module reports some fixed-1 attribute bit while KVM isn't aware > of, in such case KVM needs to set enable_tdx to 0 to reflect that TDX cannot > be enabled/brought up. OK makes sense, thanks for clarifying the use case for __tdx_bringup(). We can check the attributes_fixed1 and xfam_fixed1 also on __tdx_bringup() no problem. Regards, Tony
