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: <c26dd87a-a92a-4a1d-a57a-4c7c8b2aa1fa@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2025 13:36:51 +0800
From: Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>
To: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>
Cc: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev" <linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>,
 "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>, "Zhao, Yan Y" <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>,
 "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
 "kas@...nel.org" <kas@...nel.org>, "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
 "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
 "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
 "kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
 "Annapurve, Vishal" <vannapurve@...gle.com>, "Gao, Chao"
 <chao.gao@...el.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
 "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/16] x86/tdx: Move all TDX error defines into
 <asm/shared/tdx_errno.h>



On 9/26/2025 7:09 AM, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Tue, 2025-09-23 at 13:49 +0800, Binbin Wu wrote:
>>> +/*
>>> + * SW-defined error codes.
>>> + *
>>> + * Bits 47:40 == 0xFF indicate Reserved status code class that never used
>>> by
>>> + * TDX module.
>>> + */
>>> +#define TDX_ERROR			_BITULL(63)
>>> +#define TDX_NON_RECOVERABLE		_BITULL(62)
>> TDX_ERROR and TDX_NON_RECOVERABLE are defined in TDX spec as the classes of
>> TDX
>> Interface Functions Completion Status.
>>
>> For clarity, is it better to move the two before the "SW-defined error codes"
>> comment?
> This hunk is a direct copy, any reason to change it in this patch?
yeah, it can be done separately.