|
Re: [PATCH RFC v3 05/22] OvmfPkg: reserve Secrets page in MEMFD
For pure SEV?
How is all of the above related to the "OvmfPkg/OvmfPkgX64.dsc"
platform, where remote attestation is not a goal?
What you describe makes sense to me, but only for the
For pure SEV?
How is all of the above related to the "OvmfPkg/OvmfPkgX64.dsc"
platform, where remote attestation is not a goal?
What you describe makes sense to me, but only for the
|
By
Laszlo Ersek
·
#76127
·
|
|
Re: [RESEND PATCH RFC v3 00/22] Add AMD Secure Nested Paging (SEV-SNP) support
I re-reviewed patch #3 today, and reviewed patch #4 as well.
Because the data flow was not explained in advance, regarding the
"SevSnpEnabled" and "HypervisorFeatures" fields, I wasted a huge
I re-reviewed patch #3 today, and reviewed patch #4 as well.
Because the data flow was not explained in advance, regarding the
"SevSnpEnabled" and "HypervisorFeatures" fields, I wasted a huge
|
By
Laszlo Ersek
·
#76126
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH RFC v3 04/22] OvmfPkg/MemEncryptSevLib: extend Es Workarea to include hv features
Hi Brijesh,
(1) Please split this patch: the PlatformPei changes should be in the second patch.
(2) Overlong line.
Please avoid basic mistakes like this, even in an RFC series.
(3) These macro
Hi Brijesh,
(1) Please split this patch: the PlatformPei changes should be in the second patch.
(2) Overlong line.
Please avoid basic mistakes like this, even in an RFC series.
(3) These macro
|
By
Laszlo Ersek
·
#76125
·
|
|
Re: VirtIO sound device in qemu?
Do you mean that you can't find a way to get QEMU to create a Virtio audio device visible to the guest, or that you can't find a way to get QEMU to connect this Virtio device to the host-side audio
Do you mean that you can't find a way to get QEMU to create a Virtio audio device visible to the guest, or that you can't find a way to get QEMU to connect this Virtio device to the host-side audio
|
By
Michael Brown
·
#76124
·
|
|
Re: [edk2-platforms PATCH 1/1] Readme.md: Refer users to the Arm GNU-A Downloads page for toolchains
Pushed as 6e92566d2e61..7bf73ecc3c47
Thanks.
Regards,
Sami Mujawar
On 03/06/2021 11:34 AM, Leif Lindholm wrote:
Pushed as 6e92566d2e61..7bf73ecc3c47
Thanks.
Regards,
Sami Mujawar
On 03/06/2021 11:34 AM, Leif Lindholm wrote:
|
By
Sami Mujawar
·
#76123
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH RFC v3 03/22] OvmfPkg/MemEncryptSevLib: extend the workarea to include SNP enabled field
(3) Actually, no.
This patch should be reduced to the following files only:
- OvmfPkg/PlatformPei/AmdSev.c
- OvmfPkg/PlatformPei/PlatformPei.inf
and the following changes should be dropped
(3) Actually, no.
This patch should be reduced to the following files only:
- OvmfPkg/PlatformPei/AmdSev.c
- OvmfPkg/PlatformPei/PlatformPei.inf
and the following changes should be dropped
|
By
Laszlo Ersek
·
#76122
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH] Platform/ARM/Morello: Correct the private resources in PPTT
Hi Chandni,
I have built and verified this patch and it looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Chris Jones <christopher.jones@...>
Thanks,
Chris
Hi Chandni,
I have built and verified this patch and it looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Chris Jones <christopher.jones@...>
Thanks,
Chris
|
By
Chris Jones
·
#76121
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] MdeModulePkg/UniversalPayload: Add definition for extra info in payload
Hao,Can you give a R-b for this patch and the other one that changes PeiCore?
Hao,Can you give a R-b for this patch and the other one that changes PeiCore?
|
By
Ni, Ray
·
#76120
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] Platform/RaspberryPi: Enable Bluetooth and UART in Windows OS
Thanks for all the valuable comments, Mario. I learned a lot from your comments.
I just sent v4 for addressing your comments.
By the way, forsamples/MinComm at develop · ms-iot/samples
Thanks for all the valuable comments, Mario. I learned a lot from your comments.
I just sent v4 for addressing your comments.
By the way, forsamples/MinComm at develop · ms-iot/samples
|
By
Sunny Wang
·
#76119
·
|
|
[PATCH v4 3/3] Platform/RaspberryPi: Enable Bluetooth and UART in Windows OS
This change is based on edk2-platforms-raspberrypi-pl011-bth-noflow.diff
in https://github.com/worproject/RPi-Bluetooth-Testing/ with the
modifications and additional changes below for enabling
This change is based on edk2-platforms-raspberrypi-pl011-bth-noflow.diff
in https://github.com/worproject/RPi-Bluetooth-Testing/ with the
modifications and additional changes below for enabling
|
By
Sunny Wang
·
#76118
·
|
|
[PATCH v4 2/3] Silicon/Broadcom/Bcm283x: Clean up GpioPinSet function
Make the changes below for making it clearer.
- Rename GpioPinSet() to GpioPinConfigure()
- Rename parameter Val to Config and change its type to BOOLEAN
Cc: Sami Mujawar
Make the changes below for making it clearer.
- Rename GpioPinSet() to GpioPinConfigure()
- Rename parameter Val to Config and change its type to BOOLEAN
Cc: Sami Mujawar
|
By
Sunny Wang
·
#76117
·
|
|
[PATCH v4 1/3] Platform/RaspberryPi: Dynamically build UARTs info in ACPI
Changes:
1. Add code to ConfigDxe driver and AcpiTables module to dynamically
build either Mini UART or PL011 UART info in ACPI. This also fixes
the issue discussed in
Changes:
1. Add code to ConfigDxe driver and AcpiTables module to dynamically
build either Mini UART or PL011 UART info in ACPI. This also fixes
the issue discussed in
|
By
Sunny Wang
·
#76116
·
|
|
[PATCH v4 0/3] Dynamically build UARTs info in ACPI
In v4: Address comments given by Mario on v3.
In v3: Address comments given by Jeremy, Mario, and Pete on v2.
In v2: Address comments given by Pete on v1.
Dynamically build UARTs info in ACPI so that
In v4: Address comments given by Mario on v3.
In v3: Address comments given by Jeremy, Mario, and Pete on v2.
In v2: Address comments given by Pete on v1.
Dynamically build UARTs info in ACPI so that
|
By
Sunny Wang
·
#76115
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] Secure Boot default keys
Hi Min M,
I tested it with Ovmf. I will try other compiler and provide you logs soon.
thanks,
greg
pt., 4 cze 2021 o 10:17 Xu, Min M <min.m.xu@...> napisał(a):
Hi Min M,
I tested it with Ovmf. I will try other compiler and provide you logs soon.
thanks,
greg
pt., 4 cze 2021 o 10:17 Xu, Min M <min.m.xu@...> napisał(a):
|
By
Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...>
·
#76114
·
|
|
VirtIO sound device in qemu?
For my audio output protocol (I wonder if we should abbreviate it as
AOP?) I need to get access to VirtIO devices in PCIe configuration
space. However, I can't seem to find a way of telling QEMU to
For my audio output protocol (I wonder if we should abbreviate it as
AOP?) I need to get access to VirtIO devices in PCIe configuration
space. However, I can't seem to find a way of telling QEMU to
|
By
Ethin Probst
·
#76113
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] UefiPayloadPkg: Add PayloadLoaderPeim which can load ELF payload
Reviewed-by: Guo Dong <guo.dong@...>
Reviewed-by: Guo Dong <guo.dong@...>
|
By
Guo Dong
·
#76112
·
|
|
Re: [PATCH v1 0/8] Measured SEV boot with kernel/initrd/cmdline
I'll go with 3KB secrets + 1KB hashes.
I'll go with the two GUIDed structures in the reset vector (which will
point to distinct parts of a single 4KB page).
That actually means shortening the
I'll go with 3KB secrets + 1KB hashes.
I'll go with the two GUIDed structures in the reset vector (which will
point to distinct parts of a single 4KB page).
That actually means shortening the
|
By
Dov Murik
·
#76111
·
|
|
Re: [edk2-rfc] [edk2-devel] RFC: design review for TDVF in OVMF
In our first version of TDVF, a static 5-level page table is used. It is simple and
straight forward. But for *one binary* solution, we have to consider the compatibility
with the current 4-level page
In our first version of TDVF, a static 5-level page table is used. It is simple and
straight forward. But for *one binary* solution, we have to consider the compatibility
with the current 4-level page
|
By
Min Xu
·
#76110
·
|
|
Re: [edk2-rfc] [edk2-devel] RFC: design review for TDVF in OVMF
Secure Boot defines a security boundary between the firmware and the operating system: the operating system is not permitted to make arbitrary changes to firmware variables.
It sounds as though you
Secure Boot defines a security boundary between the firmware and the operating system: the operating system is not permitted to make arbitrary changes to firmware variables.
It sounds as though you
|
By
Michael Brown
·
#76109
·
|
|
Re: [edk2-rfc] [edk2-devel] RFC: design review for TDVF in OVMF
The "one binary" decision isn't relevant here, is it? It would make
more sense to implement 5-level paging within the base EDK2
architecture. This would allow that feature to be tested in
The "one binary" decision isn't relevant here, is it? It would make
more sense to implement 5-level paging within the base EDK2
architecture. This would allow that feature to be tested in
|
By
Michael Brown
·
#76108
·
|