[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1c4c029f82ced6ab6cf6b70748deb7fbecf1a1c2.camel@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 14:26:31 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>,
"bagasdotme@...il.com" <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
"kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
"Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"tj@...nel.org" <tj@...nel.org>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Shahar, Sagi" <sagis@...gle.com>,
"imammedo@...hat.com" <imammedo@...hat.com>,
"Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
"sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com"
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 07/18] x86/virt/tdx: Do TDX module per-cpu
initialization
On Wed, 2023-02-15 at 21:37 +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> On Wed, 2023-02-15 at 14:25 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 09:46:10AM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > > Yes agreed. Your code below looks indeed better. Thanks!
> > >
> > > Would you mind send me a patch so I can include to this series, or would you
> > > mind get it merged to tip/x86/tdx (or other branch I am not sure) so I can
> > > rebase?
> >
> > Just take the patch, add your comments and test it.. enjoy! :-)
>
> Thank you! I'll at least add your Suggested-by :)
Hi Peter,
After discussing with Kirill, I changed the way of how to handle the per-cpu
initialization, and in the new version (v10, just sent) I don't need the
schedule_on_each_cpu_cond_locked() anymore, because I essentially moved such
handling out of TDX host series to KVM. I'll use your patch if the review found
we still need to handle it. Thanks!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists