Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 13 Oct 2021 23:37:44 +0200 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v10 03/11] x86/cpufeatures: Add TDX Guest CPU feature |
| |
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 11:25:35PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > So this ends up in doing: > > use(); > init(); > > Can you spot what's wrong with that? > > That's a clear violation of common sense and is simply not going to > happen. Why? If you think about deep defensive programming then use() > will look like this: > > use() > { > assert(initialized); > } > > which is not something made up. It's a fundamental principle of > programming and some languages enforce that for very good reasons. > > Just because it can be done in C is no justification.
Oh, I heartily agree.
> What's wrong with: > > x86_64_start_kernel() > > tdx_early_init(); > > copy_bootdata(); > > tdx_late_init(); > > Absolutely nothing. It's clear, simple and well defined.
I like simple more than anyone, so sure, I'd prefer that a lot more.
And so the options parsing would need to happen early using, say, cmdline_find_option() or so, like sme_enable() does.
Hmmm.
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
| |