On 4/28/22 16:14, Kai Huang wrote: > On Thu, 2022-04-28 at 07:06 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote: >> On 4/27/22 17:15, Kai Huang wrote: >>>> Couldn't we get rid of that comment if you did something like: >>>> >>>> ret = tdx_get_sysinfo(&tdx_cmr_array, &tdx_sysinfo); >>> >>> Yes will do. >>> >>>> and preferably make the variables function-local. >>> >>> 'tdx_sysinfo' will be used by KVM too. >> >> In other words, it's not a part of this series so I can't review whether >> this statement is correct or whether there's a better way to hand this >> information over to KVM. >> >> This (minor) nugget influencing the design also isn't even commented or >> addressed in the changelog. > > TDSYSINFO_STRUCT is 1024B and CMR array is 512B, so I don't think it should be > in the stack. I can change to use dynamic allocation at the beginning and free > it at the end of the function. KVM support patches can change it to static > variable in the file. 2k of stack is big, but it isn't a deal breaker for something that's not nested anywhere and that's only called once in a pretty controlled setting and not in interrupt context. I wouldn't cry about it.
