Re: [PATCH v6 00/11] Dynamic PAMT

[Tony Lindgren]

On Mon, May 25, 2026 at 07:35:04PM -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote:
> For a simple small server with mostly physical contiguous RAM and no CXL
> complications, the basic implementation should be close to optimal anyway.
> And for big servers, an 8GB allocation is going to have less impact. In
> the end Dynamic PAMT *is* an optimization that we will force on as a
> good default option. Even with all the optimizations we could throw at it,
> if the system is 100% TDs, Dynamic PAMT could come out slightly behind. So
> judgment on good defaults is needed regardless.

>From usage point of view it's not just a memory optimization though.
These patches make it easier to see what gets allocated for TDX IMO.

This based on rebasing other patches on the dynamic PAMT series a few
times over the past year. So for the series:

Reviewed-by: Tony Lindgren <tony.lindgren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>