Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:3;
Date:   Tue, 5 Dec 2023 18:14:37 +0300
From:   "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc:     Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/coco, x86/sev: Use cpu_feature_enabled() to detect
 SEV guest flavor
Message-ID: <20231205151437.aqmuydosfmnq3zr4@box.shutemov.name>
References: <20231205143738.2875-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20231205144619.GCZW83uzAomKmupn7j@fat_crate.local>
 <20231205150012.6lma2wzcellr7pz7@box.shutemov.name>
 <20231205150648.GDZW88iAjBzYoIJ0+o@fat_crate.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231205150648.GDZW88iAjBzYoIJ0+o@fat_crate.local>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 04:06:48PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 06:00:12PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > I don't think cc_platform_has() is the right check. On TDX side we use
> > X86_FEATURE_TDX_GUEST for this and it works better than stretching
> > CC_ATTRs beyond their meaning.
> 
> You don't think it is the right check because you do something else on
> Intel?
> 
> I can't follow that argument.

My point is that if you need to check for SEV you need to check SEV, not
CC_ATTR. CC_ATTRs only make sense in generic code that deals with multiple
CoCo environments.

-- 
  Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov