From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BC3553A8 for ; Sat, 28 Oct 2023 14:07:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="YsJghcFY"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="1xqjRVFu" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1698502042; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qAZ8/ypQKsb51hCx92Cob0mTqPJOPxsmPa1MSwvVBmI=; b=YsJghcFYnSnqaFixz9uQHA7H4GDu4EHF504t285r81imS4UrUXnPT7YZN34If4C/dh+bOP K5ZdubvR6YTKatdEDUX1TC7aRCAyU5/iYVjBzvRMnmc2D45lUbRwQG+3B2wOs+kERUPnOu vUu92xav5dw2XbLRya3dl0Ntcxr/dpI9kSWW0r2h9hEPu0Vo2+4wG9FpVoVhvo2hNBd0gd 8toq2qfb5G0Ca0iLOmPt/iklKwmQZoQAc04gz4EWI+/wM/mw8DgWNz6+X5jfaz0HrwnUcE oODwu7U1noneAif+trmRttQ7fMZOD9YS5PqnruGGQYzWNJDUpZTHtszTjNQtUg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1698502042; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qAZ8/ypQKsb51hCx92Cob0mTqPJOPxsmPa1MSwvVBmI=; b=1xqjRVFuL6iiObo0Dw71zi0nfUttrZD+bjTM8N6jPRzmNK6+9jzAnIn6ESFXTGWIc3WdYN G+CPAZn6ODbbhjAg== To: "Huang, Kai" , "kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com" Cc: "kexec@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-coco@lists.linux.dev" , "ashish.kalra@amd.com" , "dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" , "thomas.lendacky@amd.com" , "Hunter, Adrian" , "Reshetova, Elena" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "Christopherson,, Sean" , "bhe@redhat.com" , "Nakajima, Jun" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "bp@alien8.de" , "Edgecombe, Rick P" , "rafael@kernel.org" , "sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com" , "x86@kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 02/13] kernel/cpu: Add support for declaring CPU offlining not supported In-Reply-To: References: <20231020151242.1814-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20231020151242.1814-3-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <0a29fef814e51a2aa0030ec9cc97366718859411.camel@intel.com> <20231023153142.bes7zxcjc2soihsl@box> Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2023 16:07:21 +0200 Message-ID: <87cywy263q.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain On Mon, Oct 23 2023 at 22:07, Kai Huang wrote: > On Mon, 2023-10-23 at 18:31 +0300, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 09:30:59AM +0000, Huang, Kai wrote: >> > IMHO it's a little bit odd to have two mechanisms in place, even in this middle >> > state patch. Is it better to completely replace CC_ATTR_HOTPLUG_DISABLED with >> > the new cpu_hotplug_offline_disabled in this patch? You can explicitly call >> > cpu_hotplug_disable_offlining() in tdx_early_init() so no functional change is >> > done. >> >> I can. But I don't see how it makes a difference. > > Personally I think this is better because it is odd to have two mechanisms in > place even temporarily especially when we can avoid it. But no hard opinion. > Up to you. It's not at all better because having this clear split makes it simpler to review and ponder the individual changes. Thanks, tglx