On 8/5/25 07:02, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
[adding Daniel to CC]
Daniel suggested that elsewhere in the thread and of course it's an
appealing proposition, as it would keep complexity down and unify
handling across CVM use cases.
However I wonder if changing things would break migration for
existing SEV(-ES) guests.
Yea. I've went the conservative way and created a test build keeping
things as-is for SEV(-ES). Just in case, I don't know for sure if there
are any failure modes if we switch guests from pflash to bios.
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/kraxel/edk2.testbuilds/build/9376581/
Thanks Gerd. I tend to agree with the conservative approach, which means the
improvements in this series are still needed for firmware auto-selection to
work with SEV and SEV-ES guests.
Unfortunately, I've hit a regression somewhere in our stack and can no longer
start existing SEV and SEV-ES guests. SNP is fine. I'll need to resolve that
before continuing to test this series.
Regards,
Jim
