MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230213172525.575766-1-dionnaglaze@google.com>
 <20230213172525.575766-2-dionnaglaze@google.com> <22e96dfd-21af-681c-22d2-12bcc082f63e@amd.com>
In-Reply-To: <22e96dfd-21af-681c-22d2-12bcc082f63e@amd.com>
From:   Dionna Amalie Glaze <dionnaglaze@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Feb 2023 14:28:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAH4kHYrz2pZzwAqoy-mpA_om1+tO8qB-4ZHc9jKh_ucwZe3OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 1/3] virt/coco/sev-guest: Add throttling awareness
To:     Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>,
        Peter Gonda <pgonda@google.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <Borislav.Petkov@amd.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Venu Busireddy <venu.busireddy@oracle.com>,
        Michael Roth <michael.roth@amd.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Michael Sterritt <sterritt@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

>
> This should really be a new, separate patch.
>

I had it as a separate patch and squashed since I felt it necessary to
be considered still a "Fixes" patch. Should both claim to fix the same
patch?

>
> It looks like you will ensure throttling by continually calling the
> hypervisor for 60 seconds, shouldn't there be a delay here?
>

I can change cond_resched() to sleep_timeout_killable(some_constant)

> > -             rc = snp_issue_guest_request(exit_code, &snp_dev->input, &err);
> > +             cond_resched();
> > +             goto retry;
> >
> > +     }
>
> Nit, add a blank line here.
>

Will do.

> Thanks,
> Tom
>


-- 
-Dionna Glaze, PhD (she/her)