Re: [PATCH v8 08/16] x86/virt/tdx: Add placeholder to construct TDMRs to cover all TDX memory regions

[Dave Hansen]

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.