[edk2-devel] [PATCH 2/2] Maintainers.txt: Add reviewers for Confidential Computing related modules

[Yao, Jiewen]

Agree. Just one "confidential computing" can make things simpler.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel at edk2.groups.io <devel at edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of James
> Bottomley
> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 11:34 PM
> To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek at redhat.com>; Xu, Min M <min.m.xu at intel.com>; Yao,
> Jiewen <jiewen.yao at intel.com>; Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh at amd.com>; Tom
> Lendacky <thomas.lendacky at amd.com>
> Cc: devel at edk2.groups.io; Andrew Fish <afish at apple.com>; Leif Lindholm
> <leif at nuviainc.com>; Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney at intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 2/2] Maintainers.txt: Add reviewers for
> Confidential Computing related modules
> 
> On Wed, 2021-03-10 at 15:20 +0100, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> [...]
> > (2) Reviewing this patch makes me realize we've missed some
> > "Maintainers.txt" updates in the past, in relation to SEV and/or
> > confidential computing.
> >
> > Namely, we did not designated any reviewers for the following
> > pathnames:
> >
> >   OvmfPkg/AmdSev/
> >   OvmfPkg/Include/Guid/ConfidentialComputingSecret.h
> >   OvmfPkg/Library/PlatformBootManagerLibGrub/
> >
> > (from <https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3077>;), also
> >
> >   OvmfPkg/ResetVector/
> >
> > (from <https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2198>;).
> >
> > That should be fixed up before adding anything TDX related (I can
> > submit a patch series, but first, the next point needs to be
> > cleared.)
> 
> I'm happy to be added for all of it ... the first three are all me and
> the last one I added something to.
> 
> > (3) After racking my brain for half an hour, I can find no good way
> > to have TDX/SEV separation *plus* a Confidential Computing section in
> > "Maintainers.txt". Whatever I managed to think of requires us to
> > either duplicate email addresses, or duplicate pathnames ("F:"
> > patterns) -- or even both.
> >
> > So... can we simply rename the current SEV subsystem to "Confidential
> > Computing", and keep both TDX and SEV modules under it? We could
> > place a unified email address list there, with Brijesh, James,
> > Jiewen, Min, Tom.
> >
> > I don't think this should cause any confusion, because:
> >
> > - @intel.com emails are clearly closely associated with TDX, and
> > @amd.com emails are clearly closely associated with SEV,
> >
> > - most filenames will (or do already) include "AmdSev" or "Tdx",
> >
> > - future patches should clearly label themselves as "SEV only", "TDX
> > only", or "confidential computing in general" -- this should be clear
> > from the patch subjects.
> 
> That should work ... it's entirely possible that SecretDxe and
> SecretPei can work for Intel as well ... we don't know yet, so they may
> not need a prefix.
> 
> > IOW, there should be no confusion as to who's required to review
> > what, but at the same time we'd have a simple solution for cross-
> > posting all interested parties.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> 
> Works for me ... IBM is interested in both SEV and TDX and having them
> be as similar as posisble.
> 
> James
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#72635): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/72635
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/81219131/1813853
Group Owner: devel+owner at edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [edk2-devel-archive at redhat.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-