From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34DB9C433EF for ; Tue, 3 May 2022 22:08:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243500AbiECWLx (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 May 2022 18:11:53 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52196 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233631AbiECWLv (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 May 2022 18:11:51 -0400 Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0761E41F94 for ; Tue, 3 May 2022 15:08:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1651615698; x=1683151698; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=nerbnEt4SBOpwjFze36Ela4kKXjEwa3lOOtHVDvZlP0=; b=aE6nPrTcecYb6HLvI34C3NWspuWUcvQOIINm7ptnIeHGhDx8cE7v2zN3 qtBf63CGfHZ0z2NJgSvElOFTJFxuKrxOFSO/sb0s6od8H8mv6LTd03UZG zDRCUymrFxlnYz+kOYAOkM14oiQLcAR7/VJuWy3IhHDy3R//OfIgItUqG Q67m/WR8494v+NyvpJYe78X2gTvRm/JV9BuCzVx01VQ2lUxidJkkkvvdD gAEKjLI3LOxRhQhuOD92KIYRG/Ua8O5uTsq9zOiVL3dTT3Kk/TiZzkaBO VuuAp61aSwtbM7XnH6l4HrOluHizwaKrTnFPHJZ1zks+l1MKQaT+rAC1U A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10336"; a="266445598" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,196,1647327600"; d="scan'208";a="266445598" Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 May 2022 15:08:17 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,196,1647327600"; d="scan'208";a="536539873" Received: from hsuhsiao-mobl2.gar.corp.intel.com (HELO khuang2-desk.gar.corp.intel.com) ([10.254.61.84]) by orsmga006-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 May 2022 15:08:13 -0700 Message-ID: <42e1af54bef03361c1a23dac8d1e4ffd8e66114a.camel@intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] x86/tdx: Add TDX Guest attestation interface driver From: Kai Huang To: Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy , Wander Costa Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , x86@kernel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , Tony Luck , Andi Kleen , Isaku Yamahata , marcelo.cerri@canonical.com, tim.gardner@canonical.com, khalid.elmously@canonical.com, philip.cox@canonical.com, open list Date: Wed, 04 May 2022 10:08:11 +1200 In-Reply-To: References: <20220501183500.2242828-1-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> <20220501183500.2242828-2-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> <5473f606bd8e60dd7b8d58a540285d126a1361bd.camel@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.42.4 (3.42.4-1.fc35) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2022-05-03 at 08:09 -0700, Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy wrote: > > On 5/3/22 7:38 AM, Wander Costa wrote: > > > I don't want to pollute the dmesg logs if possible. For IOCTL use case, > > > the return value can be used to understand the failure reason from user > > > code. But for initcall failure, pr_err message is required to understand > > > the failure reason. > > How often is this call expected to fail? > > In general, it should not fail (so very low fail frequency). But the > point is, we can easily understand this failure from user end. So we > don't need to print more in non-debug environment. > > > To support your statement, all the error codes return to userspace need to be clearly documented around the IOCTL in the uapi header. But I think you have to do this anyway. -- Thanks, -Kai