On Fri, 2023-06-30 at 11:22 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 12:15:13AM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote: > > > > Can be called locally or through an IPI function call. > > > > > > > Thanks. As in another reply, if using spinlock is OK, then I think we can say > > it will be called either locally or through an IPI function call. Otherwise, we > > do via a new separate function tdx_global_init() and no lock is needed in that > > function. The caller should call it properly. > > IPI must use raw_spinlock_t. I'm ok with using raw_spinlock_t if there's > actual need for that, but the code as presented didn't -- in comments or > otherwise -- make it clear why it was as it was. There's no hard requirement as I replied in another email. Presumably you prefer the option to have a dedicated tdx_global_init() so we can avoid the raw_spinlock_t? Thanks. > > TDX not specifying time constraints on the various TD/SEAM-CALLs is > ofcourse sad, but alas. Agreed.
