Re: [PATCH v6 05/11] x86/virt/tdx: Handle concurrent callers in tdx_pamt_get/put()
From: Dave Hansen
Date: Wed Jul 08 2026 - 17:14:37 EST
On 7/8/26 14:11, Sohil Mehta wrote:
> Instead of "Leave the atomic_t in place", would it be more appropriate
> to say "Use an (unnecessary) atomic_t to enable future ..."?
That reads fine to me.