[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d897ab70d48be4508a8a9086de1ff3953041e063.camel@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 20:58:45 +0000
From: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
To: "kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>, "Hansen, Dave"
<dave.hansen@...el.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "Huang,
Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org"
<kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev"
<linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>, "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 01/12] x86/tdx: Consolidate TDX error handling
On Wed, 2025-06-25 at 10:58 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/tdx.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/tdx.c
> > @@ -202,12 +202,6 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(tdx_lock);
> >
> > static atomic_t nr_configured_hkid;
> >
> > -static bool tdx_operand_busy(u64 err)
> > -{
> > - return (err & TDX_SEAMCALL_STATUS_MASK) == TDX_OPERAND_BUSY;
> > -}
> > -
> > -
>
> Isaku, this one was yours (along with the whitespace damage). What do
> you think of this patch?
I think this actually got added by Paolo, suggested by Binbin. I like these
added helpers a lot. KVM code is often open coded for bitwise stuff, but since
Paolo added tdx_operand_busy(), I like the idea of following the pattern more
broadly. I'm on the fence about tdx_status() though.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists