Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
Date:   Wed, 20 Apr 2022 13:55:30 -0700
From:   Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>
To:     Kai Huang <kai.huang@intel.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        seanjc@google.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, dave.hansen@intel.com,
        len.brown@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com,
        rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, reinette.chatre@intel.com,
        dan.j.williams@intel.com, peterz@infradead.org, ak@linux.intel.com,
        kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com,
        sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com,
        isaku.yamahata@intel.com, isaku.yamahata@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/21] x86/virt/tdx: Choose to use all system RAM as
 TDX memory
Message-ID: <20220420205530.GB2789321@ls.amr.corp.intel.com>
References: <cover.1649219184.git.kai.huang@intel.com>
 <dee8fb1cc2ab79cf80d4718405069715b0d51235.1649219184.git.kai.huang@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <dee8fb1cc2ab79cf80d4718405069715b0d51235.1649219184.git.kai.huang@intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 04:49:23PM +1200,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@intel.com> wrote:

> +/*
> + * Helper to loop all e820 RAM entries with low 1MB excluded
> + * in a given e820 table.
> + */
> +#define _e820_for_each_mem(_table, _i, _start, _end)				\
> +	for ((_i) = 0, e820_next_mem((_table), &(_i), &(_start), &(_end));	\
> +		(_start) < (_end);						\
> +		e820_next_mem((_table), &(_i), &(_start), &(_end)))
> +
> +/*
> + * Helper to loop all e820 RAM entries with low 1MB excluded
> + * in kernel modified 'e820_table' to honor 'mem' and 'memmap' kernel
> + * command lines.
> + */
> +#define e820_for_each_mem(_i, _start, _end)	\
> +	_e820_for_each_mem(e820_table, _i, _start, _end)
> +
> +/* Check whether first range is the subrange of the second */
> +static bool is_subrange(u64 r1_start, u64 r1_end, u64 r2_start, u64 r2_end)
> +{
> +	return (r1_start >= r2_start && r1_end <= r2_end) ? true : false;

nitpick:
Just "return (r1_start >= r2_start && r1_end <= r2_end)"
Maybe this is a matter of preference, though.

-- 
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@gmail.com>