On 2/10/23 11:36, Borislav Petkov wrote: >> One approach is to go with the individual device attributes for now.>> If the list does grow significantly, there will probably be patterns >> or groupings that we can't discern now. We could restructure into >> larger buckets at that point based on those patterns/groupings. > There's a reason the word "platform" is in cc_platform_has(). Initially > we wanted to distinguish attributes of the different platforms. So even > if y'all don't like CC_ATTR_PARAVISOR, that is what distinguishes this > platform and it *is* one platform. > > So call it CC_ATTR_SEV_VTOM as it uses that technology or whatever. But > call it like the platform, not to mean "I need this functionality". I can live with that. There's already a CC_ATTR_GUEST_SEV_SNP, so it would at least not be too much of a break from what we already have.
