Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] x86/tdx: Fix early #VE handling

[Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>]

On Fri, May 20, 2022, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2022, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > Move RIP in tdx_early_handle_ve() after handling the exception. Failure
> > to do that leads to infinite loop of exceptions.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
> > Fixes: 32e72854fa5f ("x86/tdx: Port I/O: Add early boot support")
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c | 6 +++++-
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c b/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c
> > index 03deb4d6920d..faae53f8d559 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c
> > @@ -447,13 +447,17 @@ static bool handle_io(struct pt_regs *regs, u32 exit_qual)
> >  __init bool tdx_early_handle_ve(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >  {
> >  	struct ve_info ve;
> > +	bool ret;
> >  
> >  	tdx_get_ve_info(&ve);
> >  
> >  	if (ve.exit_reason != EXIT_REASON_IO_INSTRUCTION)
> >  		return false;
> >  
> > -	return handle_io(regs, ve.exit_qual);
> > +	ret = handle_io(regs, ve.exit_qual);
> > +	if (ret)
> 
> Ugh, the boolean returns instead of 0/-errno are fugly.  At first glance I thought
> this was wrong, i.e. advancing RIP on failure.
> 
> Assuming moving away from booleans isn't happening anytime soon maybe s/ret/success
> or s/ret/handled to make it more obvious that it's a happy path?

Doh, should have looked at patch 2...