lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-10-13 23:38    [W:0.109 / U:0.708 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site