Re: [virtio-comment] [PATCH v1 1/8] admin: Add theory of operation for device migration

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 07:51:06PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 7:38âPM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 11:07:53AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > How TDISP/attestation is related to a specific device driver? How can
> > > a legacy DPDK driver break things like attestation here?
> > >
> > > > Hence it is not applicable.
> > >
> > > Wow. The legacy tunnel was just invented by you for just several
> > > months and soon became a second-class citizen in the proposal here?
> >
> > Legacy is not going to be a 1st class citizen and that was a
> > concious decision the TC made.
> > In particular we know straight
> > away that there is no way to make them safely work
> > while preserving assumptions confidential computing
> > guests make (which I guess is what you mean here).
> 
> Probably, but I think we need to support its migration without TD.

Ah, migration of legacy guests is an interesting point.
Bringing up TD was just confusing.

I expect this to be rather painless to add precisely
because this proposal does not reply on either modern
or legacy pci layout. But details need to be thought
through, I agree. I don't see why this is not applicable -
definitely people are used to be able to migrate these
guests.


> > The whole point of isolating legacy mess in the special
> > commands was so we don't try to support them going forward,
> > don't try to add new features for legacy interfaces please.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> >
> > --
> > MST
> >