Re: [RFC PATCH 03/15] x86/tdx: Add TDG.TDI.RD module call wrapper for TDX Connect

["Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>]

On Thu, 2026-10-08 at 06:27 +0000, Duan, Zhenzhong wrote:
> > But I wonder if something is lost in handling these all by default. Don't we
> > need to consider each error? For example, if accept gets a busy and we toss
> > this back. Is the caller supposed to retry? Does it expect to? Or should we
> > do something to avoid the busy in the first place? We need to at least
> > examine each possible error condition as part of the implementation.
> 
> Yes, the current mcall use cases actually don't check for busy returns, so I
> do the same in this series. I'm operating on the assumption that TD guests are
> implicitly designed to prevent the TDX module contention that triggers a
> busy state.

Uh... we are designing the TD guest here... so who are you expecting to do this
design? But also, the host can take these busy error generating locks too.
Please investigate the specific errors of these calls you are adding. Ping me or
Yan offline if you need help deciphering the TDX docs or code around this.

> 
> For other TDX errors, we don't deeply differentiate between them. To keep
> things clean, we only map specific errno values to the TDX errors which are
> more common.

Especially if this is actually intended to be a wider solution, please justify
specifically what it will help.