Re: [PATCH v2 03/12] x86/sev: Add an x86 version of prot_guest_has()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 10:52:53AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Which suggest that the name is not good to start with.  Maybe protected
> hardware, system or platform might be a better choice?

Yah, coming up with a proper name here hasn't been easy.
prot_guest_has() is not the first variant.

>From all three things you suggest above, I guess calling it a "platform"
is the closest. As in, this is a confidential computing platform which
provides host and guest facilities etc.

So calling it

confidential_computing_platform_has()

is obviously too long.

ccp_has() clashes with the namespace of drivers/crypto/ccp/ which is
used by the technology too.

coco_platform_has() is too unserious.

So I guess

cc_platform_has()

ain't all that bad.

Unless you have a better idea, ofc.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux