On 06/22/2021 9:39 PM, Laszlo wrote:
>
> I should clarify: the relevant part of my preference is not that
> "IntelTdx.dsc"
> contain the *complete* TDVF feature set. The relevant part (for me) is that
> "OvmfPkgX64.dsc" *not* be over-complicated for the sake of TDX, even
> considering only the "basic" TDVF feature set. It's fine to implement TDX in
> two
> stages ("basic" and "complete"); my point is that even "basic" should not
> over-
> complicate "OvmfPkgX64.dsc".
>
Thanks much for the comments and we don't want to make OvmfPkgX64.dsc
over-complicated either.
We have updated the design slides to V0.95 and Slides 6-15 are discussing the
Config-A and Config-B.
https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/files/Designs/2021/0611/TDVF_Design_Review%28v0.95%29.pptx
Your comment is always welcome!
Thanks!
Min
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#77016): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/77016
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/83283616/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
