[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <14b13fe4-7a0d-4ddb-92e9-bbe557b5bc15@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 1 May 2025 10:50:57 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Cedric Xing <cedric.xing@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
Dionna Amalie Glaze <dionnaglaze@...gle.com>,
Guorui Yu <guorui.yu@...ux.alibaba.com>,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Dan Middleton <dan.middleton@...ux.intel.com>,
Mikko Ylinen <mikko.ylinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] x86/tdx: Add tdx_mcall_extend_rtmr() interface
On 4/24/25 13:12, Cedric Xing wrote:
> + ret = __tdcall(TDG_MR_RTMR_EXTEND, &args);
> + if (ret) {
> + if (TDCALL_RETURN_CODE(ret) == TDCALL_INVALID_OPERAND)
> + return -ENXIO;
> + if (TDCALL_RETURN_CODE(ret) == TDCALL_OPERAND_BUSY)
> + return -EBUSY;
> + return -EIO;
> + }
This a pretty ugly switch statement. ;)
I assume there are more of these around, but it would be _nice_ if these
could eventually look like:
...
err = __tdcall(...);
return tdx_err_to_errno(err);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists