[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e7878046807833c718b54eae3e3066a28cca406b.camel@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2023 10:37:02 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com"
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>,
"bagasdotme@...il.com" <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.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>,
"Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
"nik.borisov@...e.com" <nik.borisov@...e.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Shahar, Sagi" <sagis@...gle.com>,
"imammedo@...hat.com" <imammedo@...hat.com>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 07/22] x86/virt/tdx: Add skeleton to enable TDX on
demand
On Mon, 2023-06-26 at 14:21 -0700, Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy wrote:
> > + /* All '0's are just unused parameters. */
>
> I have noticed that you add the above comment whenever you call seamcall()
> with
> 0 as parameters. Is this a ask from the maintainer? If not, I think you can
> skip
> it. Just explaining the parameters in seamcall function definition is good
> enough.
Yes I followed maintainer (I didn't bother to find the exact link this time,
though). I think in this way we don't need to go to TDX module spec to check
whether 0 has meaning in each SEAMCALL, especially in code review. I kinda
agree having them in multiple places is a little bit noisy, but I don't have a
better way.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists