[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cd48825b-7197-fc04-51e6-04bd8502d286@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2022 08:09:45 -0700
From: Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
To: Wander Costa <wander@...hat.com>
Cc: Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@...il.com>,
marcelo.cerri@...onical.com, tim.gardner@...onical.com,
khalid.elmously@...onical.com, philip.cox@...onical.com,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] x86/tdx: Add TDX Guest attestation interface
driver
On 5/3/22 7:38 AM, Wander Costa wrote:
>> I don't want to pollute the dmesg logs if possible. For IOCTL use case,
>> the return value can be used to understand the failure reason from user
>> code. But for initcall failure, pr_err message is required to understand
>> the failure reason.
> How often is this call expected to fail?
In general, it should not fail (so very low fail frequency). But the
point is, we can easily understand this failure from user end. So we
don't need to print more in non-debug environment.
>
--
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
Linux Kernel Developer
Powered by blists - more mailing lists