On 9/9/25 10:41, dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
So PCI_EXP_DEVCAP_TEE means that there may be a DSM,
This bit I am not sure about. A bit hard to believe that PF0 is always expected to support passing through to a CVM. Thanks,
I am losing track of your specific feedback, or what changes or being
I've reread the thread, I wrongly assumed "tee" is used to decide whether to show "connect" in sysfs or not. I guess I was a bit tired^woverwhelmed when I made that comment, my bad.
suggested here is the summary of what the spec assumptions and what the
core supports:
Spec assumptions:
- DEVCAP_TEE on a physical function is independent of IDE cap
Right, I just want to make sure that PF0 that manages TEE VFs does not have to have the TEE bit itself.
- SPDM for IDE and TDISP is only allowed on physical function 0
Implementation assumptions:
- IDE without TDISP is a use case
- TDISP without IDE is a per TSM-DSM pairing implementation decision
- An upstream switch port DSM can manage downstream endpoints
- Guest needs some indication that a PCI device can attempt to be
locked. Either device or VMM emulation can set DEVCAP_TEE for that
purpose.
All true. Thanks,
--
Alexey
