linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 01/16] x86/tdx: Move all TDX error defines into <asm/shared/tdx

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <72ddc0da1fb3e949d5b6a3ff73186799dab988e4.camel@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 23:32:03 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev"
	<linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>, "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>,
	"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>, "mingo@...hat.com"
	<mingo@...hat.com>, "kas@...nel.org" <kas@...nel.org>, "pbonzini@...hat.com"
	<pbonzini@...hat.com>, "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Annapurve, Vishal"
	<vannapurve@...gle.com>, "Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>, "Edgecombe, Rick
 P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
CC: "kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/16] x86/tdx: Move all TDX error defines into
 <asm/shared/tdx_errno.h>

On Thu, 2025-09-25 at 23:23 +0000, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-09-19 at 01:29 +0000, Huang, Kai wrote:
> > The existing asm/shared/tdx.h is used for sharing TDX code between the
> > early compressed code and the normal kernel code after that, i.e., it's
> > not for sharing between TDX guest and host.
> > 
> > Any reason to put the new tdx_errno.h under asm/shared/ ?
> 
> Well this series doesn't address this, but the compressed code could use
> IS_TDX_SUCCESS(), etc. I assume the purpose was to put it in a place where all
> callers could use them.

Sure. 

> 
> If you think that is good reasoning too, then I think it's worth mentioning in
> the log.

I am fine either way.

Since (as you said) compressed code isn't changed to use IS_TDX_xx() in
this series, it's hard to see the reason (from the code change) why you
put it under asm/shared/ w/o explaining it in the changelog.