Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-84057-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes
To: =?iso-8859-15?Q?Michal_Koutn=FD?= <mkoutny@suse.com>
Cc: jarkko@kernel.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, tj@kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
 cgroups@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
 hpa@zytor.com, sohil.mehta@intel.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
 zhiquan1.li@intel.com, kristen@linux.intel.com, seanjc@google.com,
 zhanb@microsoft.com, anakrish@microsoft.com, mikko.ylinen@linux.intel.com,
 yangjie@microsoft.com, chrisyan@microsoft.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 04/15] x86/sgx: Implement basic EPC misc cgroup
 functionality
References: <20240205210638.157741-1-haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>
 <20240205210638.157741-5-haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>
 <7u3intene6yvlkuks5bix3tx27wog3da6ki5w2l5flaod5mjrq@flgmfdd4fbei>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 15:35:38 -0600
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
From: "Haitao Huang" <haitao.huang@linux.intel.com>
Organization: Intel
Message-ID: <op.2jtkxougwjvjmi@hhuan26-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <7u3intene6yvlkuks5bix3tx27wog3da6ki5w2l5flaod5mjrq@flgmfdd4fbei>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32)

On Mon, 26 Feb 2024 12:25:58 -0600, Michal Koutn=FD <mkoutny@suse.com> w=
rote:

> On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 01:06:27PM -0800, Haitao Huang  =

> <haitao.huang@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> +static int sgx_epc_cgroup_alloc(struct misc_cg *cg);
>> +
>> +const struct misc_res_ops sgx_epc_cgroup_ops =3D {
>> +	.alloc =3D sgx_epc_cgroup_alloc,
>> +	.free =3D sgx_epc_cgroup_free,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static void sgx_epc_misc_init(struct misc_cg *cg, struct  =

>> sgx_epc_cgroup *epc_cg)
>> +{
>> +	cg->res[MISC_CG_RES_SGX_EPC].priv =3D epc_cg;
>> +	epc_cg->cg =3D cg;
>> +}
>
> This is a possibly a nit pick but I share it here for consideration.
>
> Would it be more prudent to have the signature like
>   alloc(struct misc_res *res, struct misc_cg *cg)
> so that implementations are free of the assumption of how cg and res a=
re
> stored?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Michal

Will do.

Thanks
Haitao