[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230806114131.2ilofgmxhdaa2u6b@box.shutemov.name>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2023 14:41:31 +0300
From: kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com
To: Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
dave.hansen@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de,
mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org, seanjc@...gle.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, isaku.yamahata@...el.com,
sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com,
n.borisov.lkml@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/12] x86/virt/tdx: Allow SEAMCALL to handle #UD and
#GP
On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 11:25:13PM +1200, Kai Huang wrote:
> @@ -20,6 +21,9 @@
> #define TDX_SW_ERROR (TDX_ERROR | GENMASK_ULL(47, 40))
> #define TDX_SEAMCALL_VMFAILINVALID (TDX_SW_ERROR | _UL(0xFFFF0000))
>
> +#define TDX_SEAMCALL_GP (TDX_SW_ERROR | X86_TRAP_GP)
> +#define TDX_SEAMCALL_UD (TDX_SW_ERROR | X86_TRAP_UD)
Is there any explantion how these error codes got chosen? Looks very
arbitrary and may collide with other error codes in the future.
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists