Jiewen, Sure. I am ok with this. Acked-by: Ray Ni <[email protected]> It doesn't make the code worse. Dynamic PCD was there already.
Thanks, Ray > -----Original Message----- > From: Yao, Jiewen <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 10:29 AM > To: Brijesh Singh <[email protected]>; Ni, Ray <[email protected]>; > [email protected] > Cc: James Bottomley <[email protected]>; Xu, Min M <[email protected]>; Tom > Lendacky > <[email protected]>; Justen, Jordan L <[email protected]>; Ard > Biesheuvel > <[email protected]>; Erdem Aktas <[email protected]>; Michael > Roth <[email protected]>; Gerd > Hoffmann <[email protected]>; Kinney, Michael D <[email protected]>; > Liming Gao > <[email protected]>; Liu, Zhiguang <[email protected]>; Kumar, > Rahul1 <[email protected]>; Dong, > Eric <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: [PATCH v12 20/32] MdePkg: Define ConfidentialComputingGuestAttr > > Brijesh and Ray > I don’t disagree the disadvantage of dynamic PCD. > However, dynamic PCD is widely used in today's solution. > > If developers know clearly when this PCD value is finalized, then it won't be > a problem. > > Otherwise, I prefer we drop the dynamic PCD support in EDKII infrastructure. > That would be a huge change!!! > > Please note this is already *version 12*. We really need move forward. > I suggest we keep it as is and check in. > If we find problem later, we can resolve the specific issue. > > Thank you > Yao Jiewen > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Brijesh Singh <[email protected]> > > Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 1:08 AM > > To: Ni, Ray <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected]; James Bottomley <[email protected]>; Xu, Min M > > <[email protected]>; Yao, Jiewen <[email protected]>; Tom Lendacky > > <[email protected]>; Justen, Jordan L <[email protected]>; > > Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]>; Erdem Aktas > > <[email protected]>; Michael Roth <[email protected]>; Gerd > > Hoffmann <[email protected]>; Kinney, Michael D > > <[email protected]>; Liming Gao <[email protected]>; Liu, > > Zhiguang <[email protected]>; Kumar, Rahul1 <[email protected]>; > > Dong, Eric <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 20/32] MdePkg: Define > > ConfidentialComputingGuestAttr > > > > Hi Ray, > > > > On 11/11/21 8:00 AM, Ni, Ray wrote: > > > I don't prefer to use a dynamic PCD for passing data. > > > > > > Because developers don't know when this PCD value is finalized (PCD always > > has a default value). > > > > > > If the value is determined in PEI and consumed in DXE, HOB is a better > > > choice. > > > If the value is determined in PEI and consumed in PEI, PPI is a better > > > choice. > > (you can use PPI depex) > > > If the value is determined in DXE and consumed in DXE, Protocol is a > > > better > > choice. (You can use Protocol depex) > > > > > > > I wish you had raised your concerns early to avoid going in this PCD > > direction. The PCD approach was discussed some time back. Both the > > SEV-SNP and TDX patches are dependent on it. > > > > Having said so, if your preference is not to use the PCD, then it can be > > done after SNP and TDX patches are merged. > > > > Jiewen/Min/Gerd thoughts? > > > > thanks > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Brijesh Singh <[email protected]> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2021 6:15 AM > > > To: [email protected] > > > Cc: James Bottomley <[email protected]>; Xu, Min M > > <[email protected]>; Yao, Jiewen <[email protected]>; Tom Lendacky > > <[email protected]>; Justen, Jordan L <[email protected]>; > > Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]>; Erdem Aktas > > <[email protected]>; Michael Roth <[email protected]>; Gerd > > Hoffmann <[email protected]>; Kinney, Michael D > > <[email protected]>; Liming Gao <[email protected]>; Liu, > > Zhiguang <[email protected]>; Ni, Ray <[email protected]>; Kumar, Rahul1 > > <[email protected]>; Dong, Eric <[email protected]>; Brijesh Singh > > <[email protected]>; Michael Roth <[email protected]> > > > Subject: [PATCH v12 20/32] MdePkg: Define ConfidentialComputingGuestAttr > > > > > > BZ: > > https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla. > > tianocore.org%2Fshow_bug.cgi%3Fid%3D3275&data=04%7C01%7Cbrijesh. > > singh%40amd.com%7C40483d937fa84cebe69908d9a51b9afd%7C3dd8961fe488 > > 4e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637722360254370524%7CUnknown%7 > > CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJ > > XVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=EtT7bzDCZxsMA9sTCqISftp62QbezdoSf4k2 > > eCfZsws%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > While initializing APs, the MpInitLib may need to know whether the guest > > > is > > running with active AMD SEV or Intel TDX memory encryption. > > > > > > Add a new ConfidentialComputingGuestAttr PCD that can be used to query the > > memory encryption attribute. > > > > > > Cc: Michael D Kinney <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Liming Gao <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Zhiguang Liu <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Michael Roth <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Ray Ni <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Rahul Kumar <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Eric Dong <[email protected]> > > > Cc: James Bottomley <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Min Xu <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Jiewen Yao <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Tom Lendacky <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Jordan Justen <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Erdem Aktas <[email protected]> > > > Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]> > > > Suggested-by: Jiewen Yao <[email protected]> > > > Acked-by: Gerd Hoffmann <[email protected]> > > > Signed-off-by: Brijesh Singh <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > MdePkg/MdePkg.dec | 4 +++ > > > .../Include/ConfidentialComputingGuestAttr.h | 25 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+) > > > create mode 100644 MdePkg/Include/ConfidentialComputingGuestAttr.h > > > > > > diff --git a/MdePkg/MdePkg.dec b/MdePkg/MdePkg.dec index > > 8b18415b107a..cd903c35d2ff 100644 > > > --- a/MdePkg/MdePkg.dec > > > +++ b/MdePkg/MdePkg.dec > > > @@ -2396,5 +2396,9 @@ [PcdsFixedAtBuild, PcdsPatchableInModule, > > PcdsDynamic, PcdsDynamicEx] > > > # @Prompt FSB Clock. > > > gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdFSBClock|200000000|UINT32|0x0000000c > > > > > > + ## This dynamic PCD indicates the memory encryption attribute of the > > > guest. > > > + # @Prompt Memory encryption attribute > > > + > > gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdConfidentialComputingGuestAttr|0|UINT64|0x > > > + 0000002e > > > + > > > [UserExtensions.TianoCore."ExtraFiles"] > > > MdePkgExtra.uni > > > diff --git a/MdePkg/Include/ConfidentialComputingGuestAttr.h > > b/MdePkg/Include/ConfidentialComputingGuestAttr.h > > > new file mode 100644 > > > index 000000000000..495b0df0ac33 > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/MdePkg/Include/ConfidentialComputingGuestAttr.h > > > @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ > > > +/** @file > > > +Definitions for Confidential Computing Attribute > > > + > > > +Copyright (c) 2021 AMD Inc. All rights reserved.<BR> > > > +SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause-Patent > > > + > > > +**/ > > > + > > > +#ifndef CONFIDENTIAL_COMPUTING_GUEST_ATTR_H_ > > > +#define CONFIDENTIAL_COMPUTING_GUEST_ATTR_H_ > > > + > > > +typedef enum { > > > + /* The guest is running with memory encryption disabled. */ > > > + CCAttrNotEncrypted = 0, > > > + > > > + /* The guest is running with AMD SEV memory encryption enabled. */ > > > + CCAttrAmdSev = 0x100, > > > + CCAttrAmdSevEs = 0x101, > > > + CCAttrAmdSevSnp = 0x102, > > > + > > > + /* The guest is running with Intel TDX memory encryption enabled. */ > > > + CCAttrIntelTdx = 0x200, > > > +} CONFIDENTIAL_COMPUTING_GUEST_ATTR; > > > + > > > +#endif > > > -- > > > 2.25.1 > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#83677): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/83677 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/86969144/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
