[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aWh9HiqO4NWuFBwu@yilunxu-OptiPlex-7050>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 13:37:34 +0800
From: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...ux.intel.com>
To: Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>
Cc: linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, reinette.chatre@...el.com, ira.weiny@...el.com,
kai.huang@...el.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com, sagis@...gle.com,
vannapurve@...gle.com, paulmck@...nel.org, nik.borisov@...e.com,
Farrah Chen <farrah.chen@...el.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kas@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 16/21] x86/virt/seamldr: Handle TDX Module update
failures
> static void print_update_failure_message(void)
> @@ -331,7 +323,7 @@ static int do_seamldr_install_module(void *params)
> touch_nmi_watchdog();
> rcu_momentary_eqs();
> }
> - } while (curstate != TDP_DONE);
> + } while (curstate != TDP_DONE && !atomic_read(&tdp_data.failed));
Ah, yes. That's idea of immediate error out I'm thinking of, your
implementation is better.
>
> return ret;
> }
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists