From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a01:7e0:0:424::9]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1B221FF16F for ; Tue, 14 Oct 2025 09:51:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 08E312212A; Tue, 14 Oct 2025 09:51:25 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <20afb5f5-caba-4e7b-ae98-be92498b199b@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 09:50:51 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Anton Iacobaeus , Proxmox VE development discussion References: <20251001151237.50385-1-anton.iacobaeus@canarybit.eu> <20251001151237.50385-4-anton.iacobaeus@canarybit.eu> <7fc5b715-23c8-4245-b65c-5760c5958d2f@proxmox.com> <8c2d3d17-4664-43fe-b777-885ac92ed0d4@canarybit.eu> Content-Language: en-US From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: <8c2d3d17-4664-43fe-b777-885ac92ed0d4@canarybit.eu> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1760428214446 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.022 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH edk2-firmware v2 3/3] Add SCSI in NCCFV for TD guest X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox VE development discussion Cc: Philipp Giersfeld Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pve-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pve-devel" Am 13.10.25 um 4:01 PM schrieb Anton Iacobaeus: > On 10/7/25 17:24, Fiona Ebner wrote: >> Am 04.10.25 um 3:23 PM schrieb Anton Iacobaeus: >>> From: Philipp Giersfeld >>> >>> The FV in `IntelTdx/IntelTdxX64.fdf` was split into two FVs, one for a >>> TD guest and one for non-cc guest. The SCSI driver was moved to the >>> non-cc NCCFV. In order for PVE to use an image with SCSI include the >>> SCSI driver in the FV for TD guest. >> >> Did you already ask upstream whether they would be willing to include >> SCSI for the TD guest or is there no interest? Some of it is already >> guarded via _ENABLE flags anyways. I'm fine with going with this, but >> it's always nice to have no more diff than necessary to upstream. >> > > We asked upstream and they said that there is no architecture issue with > the SCSI driver, but it is a matter of validation. As of now there are > no plans to include it, but an official request for it could be made. > The process will likely be lengthy however and they also mentioned that > including the driver manually is a good option. Good to know! The patch is rather straight-forward, so let's just go with including it manually. _______________________________________________ pve-devel mailing list pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel