Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/tdx: Accept hotplugged memory before online

["Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>]

On Wed, 2026-04-01 at 08:39 -0700, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> > Would it not be better to have this information in the unaccepted
> > bitmap which we could explicitly query to accept/unaccept?
> 
> It makes me think about shared memory too. Should the unplug event
> also signal the host to reset the memory to private? If the VMM is
> actually not adjusting the guest mapping for a unplug/re-plug then
> the memory would come back as shared.
> 
> But it really starts to feel like work the host should be doing.

Although if memory was able to be unplugged, the Linux guest would have
reset the memory to private when it was done with the memory. But from
a interface perspective, it seems weird to require the guest to signal
this because private/shared state is ultimately controlled by the host.
Unlike accept state where the guest gets some say.