lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v10 03/11] x86/cpufeatures: Add TDX Guest CPU feature
    On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:25:35PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
    > So this ends up in doing:
    >
    > use();
    > init();
    >
    > Can you spot what's wrong with that?
    >
    > That's a clear violation of common sense and is simply not going to
    > happen. Why? If you think about deep defensive programming then use()
    > will look like this:
    >
    > use()
    > {
    > assert(initialized);
    > }
    >
    > which is not something made up. It's a fundamental principle of
    > programming and some languages enforce that for very good reasons.
    >
    > Just because it can be done in C is no justification.

    Oh, I heartily agree.

    > What's wrong with:
    >
    > x86_64_start_kernel()
    >
    > tdx_early_init();
    >
    > copy_bootdata();
    >
    > tdx_late_init();
    >
    > Absolutely nothing. It's clear, simple and well defined.

    I like simple more than anyone, so sure, I'd prefer that a lot more.

    And so the options parsing would need to happen early using, say,
    cmdline_find_option() or so, like sme_enable() does.

    Hmmm.

    --
    Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

    https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2021-10-13 23:38    [W:3.955 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site