Re: [PATCH v2 01/31] x86/tdx: Move all TDX error defines into <asm/shared/tdx_errno.h>

[Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>]

Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> On Sat, 2026-03-28 at 00:01 +0800, Xu Yilun wrote:
> > From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> > Today there are two separate locations where TDX error codes are defined:
> >          arch/x86/include/asm/tdx.h
> >          arch/x86/kvm/vmx/tdx_errno.h
> > 
> > They have some overlap that is already defined similarly. Reduce the
> > duplication and prepare to introduce some helpers for these error codes in
> > the central place by unifying them. Join them at:
> >         asm/shared/tdx_errno.h
> > ...and update the headers that contained the duplicated definitions to
> > include the new unified header.
> > 
> > "asm/shared" is used for sharing TDX code between the early compressed
> > code and the normal kernel code. While the compressed code for the guest
> > doesn't use these error code header definitions today, it does make the
> > types of calls that return the values they define. So place the defines in
> > "shared" location so that it can, but leave such cleanups for future
> > changes.
> > 
> > Also, adjust BITUL() -> _BITULL() to address 32 bit build errors after the
> > move.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
> > [enhance log]
> > Signed-off-by: Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@intel.com>
> 
> I think it is missing Kai's RB from sys disable v1, and your sign off.
> 
> This patch is in three series now, hence the long SOB chain. And I think it is
> also the only KVM touch point in the series. If sys disable gets merged ahead of
> time it can be dropped. But if there is any lag there we should see if Dave will
> just take it instead of trying to keep it in sync.

Thanks for the heads up.

I think if we are committed to the idea that some TDX related sets may
go through different upstreams and some of those sets have a small
handful of common infrastructure patches then there are a few options.
Either have someone keep an eye for these and publish stable-commits for
folks to share, accept that duplication collisions will happen and
rebase when they do, or accept that duplication collisions be ok with
that small bit of mess showing up in the history.

In this case, for the tsm.git#staging branch, I will replace this with a
fresh application of this:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260323-fuller_tdx_kexec_support-v2-1-87a36409e051@intel.com/

Yilun, going forward, if you borrow a patch from another set, be sure to
both add your own signed-off-by, but also a:

Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260323-fuller_tdx_kexec_support-v2-1-87a36409e051@intel.com

...to make it extra clear you are including a patch that is already on
the list in another set.

I suspect that by the time this set is ready to move from
tsm.git#staging to tsm.git#next a stable commit-id may be available for
a rebase.