On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 06:40:34AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 10/19/20 1:45 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 07:50:43AM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > >> +config INTEL_SGX > > Since the directory for this was renamed some iterations ago from > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx to intel_sgx given the feedback from Boris, > > I'm wondering should this also be renamed as X86_SGX? > > I say yes for two reasons: > > We're recently adding a prohibition against vendors adding > VENDOR_FEATURE, preferring "FEATURE" instead. But, I seriously doubt > anyone else is going to to to the effort that Intel did here. > > Also "SGX" is short enough that I can imagine someone else plausibly > wanting to do CONFIG_SGX for something else. > > So, I'm OK with keeping "INTEL_SGX", but I'd also be fine with "X86_SGX". I'll rename it to X86_SGX, given that we changed the directory earlier (based on feedback) from "intel_sgx" to "sgx". /Jarkko
