lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v8 08/16] x86/virt/tdx: Add placeholder to construct TDMRs to cover all TDX memory regions
    From
    On 1/9/23 16:40, Huang, Kai wrote:
    > On Fri, 2023-01-06 at 11:24 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
    ...
    >> Also, tdmr_sz and max_tdmrs can both be derived from 'sysinfo'. Do they
    >> really need to be stored here?
    >
    > It's not mandatory to keep them here. I did it mainly because I want to avoid
    > passing 'sysinfo' as argument for almost all functions related to constructing
    > TDMRs.

    I don't think it hurts readability that much. On the contrary, it makes
    it more clear what data is needed for initialization.

    >> If so, I think I'd probably do something
    >> like this with the structure:
    >>
    >> struct tdmr_info_list {
    >> struct tdmr_info *tdmrs;
    >> int nr_consumed_tdmrs; // How many @tdmrs are in use
    >>
    >> /* Metadata for freeing this structure: */
    >> int tdmr_sz; // Size of one 'tdmr_info' (has a flex array)
    >> int max_tdmrs; // How many @tdmrs are allocated
    >> };
    >>
    >> Modulo whataver folks are doing for comments these days.
    >
    > Looks nice to me. Will use. A slight thing is 'tdmr_sz' is also used to get
    > the TDMR at a given index, but not just freeing the structure.
    >
    > Btw, is C++ style comment "//" OK in kernel code?

    It's OK with me, but I don't think there's much consensus on it.
    Probably best to stick with normal arch/x86 style for now.



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2023-03-26 23:34    [W:3.102 / U:0.000 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site