Open Stack

On Wed, 2018-11-21 at 20:34 +0000, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2018-11-21 21:23:51 +0100 (+0100), melanie witt wrote:
> [...]
> > The vTPM support spec was merged about two weeks ago and we are
> > awaiting implementation patches from cfriesen.
> 
> [...]
> 
> Thanks, I had somehow missed noticing this spec up to now. I'm
> curious to follow the implementation and find out how we go about
> making sure users don't get the impression that an emulated TPM
> provides anywhere near the same sorts of guarantees as real one.
  while its out of scope of the proposed spec it does methion the posiblity
  of passing through a host tpm at some point if there was a demand for that.

on a side note who was aware that out of tree hyperv dirver already support vtpm
http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/compute-hyperv/tree/compute_hyperv/nova/vmops.py#n1334

there was a spec for the hyperv support back to liberty and mitaka.
and was completed in tech preview as part of https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/hyper-v-vtpm-devices

The current specs referenced in the starlinX gaps is for libvirt specifically but it would be good to
see vtpm feature in other driver in the future. i dont know if the hyperv folk still want
to get there vTPM feature into the intree driver but it woudl be interesting to 
see if this will show up in the powervm or vmware drivers at some point.