On Wed, Apr 26, 2023, Carlos Bilbao wrote: > On 4/26/23 10:51 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > This document is named confidential-computing.rst, not tdx-and-snp.rst. Not > > explicitly mentioning SEV doesn't magically warp reality to make descriptions like > > this one from security/secrets/coco.rst disappear: > > > > Introduction > > ============ > > > > Confidential Computing (coco) hardware such as AMD SEV (Secure Encrypted > > Virtualization) allows guest owners to inject secrets into the VMs > > memory without the host/hypervisor being able to read them. > > > > My complaint about this document being too Intel/AMD centric isn't that it doesn't > > mention other implementations, it's that the doc describes CoCo purely from the > > narrow viewpoint of Intel TDX and AMD SNP, and to be blunt, reads like a press > > release and not an objective overview of CoCo. > > Be specific about the parts of the document that you feel are too > AMD/Intel centric, and we will correct them. The whole thing? There aren't specific parts that are too SNP/TDX centric, the entire tone and approach of the document is wrong. As I responded to Dave, I would feel differently if the document were named tdx-and-snp-threat-model.rst, but this patch proposes a generic confidential-computing.rst and presents the SNP+TDX confidential VM use case as if it's the *only* confidential computing use case.
