Re: [PATCH v13 06/22] x86/virt/tdx: Add SEAMCALL error printing for module initialization

[Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>]

On 8/25/23 05:14, Kai Huang wrote:
> +#define SEAMCALL_PRERR(__seamcall_func, __fn, __args, __seamcall_err_func)	\
> +({										\
> +	u64 ___sret = __SEAMCALL_PRERR(__seamcall_func, __fn, __args,		\
> +			__seamcall_err_func, pr_err);				\
> +	int ___ret;								\
> +										\
> +	switch (___sret) {							\
> +	case TDX_SUCCESS:							\
> +		___ret = 0;							\
> +		break;								\
> +	case TDX_SEAMCALL_VMFAILINVALID:					\
> +		pr_err("SEAMCALL failed: TDX module not loaded.\n");		\
> +		___ret = -ENODEV;						\
> +		break;								\
> +	case TDX_SEAMCALL_GP:							\
> +		pr_err("SEAMCALL failed: TDX disabled by BIOS.\n");		\
> +		___ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;						\
> +		break;								\
> +	case TDX_SEAMCALL_UD:							\
> +		pr_err("SEAMCALL failed: CPU not in VMX operation.\n");		\
> +		___ret = -EACCES;						\
> +		break;								\
> +	default:								\
> +		___ret = -EIO;							\
> +	}									\
> +	___ret;									\
> +})

I have no clue where all of this came from or why it is necessary or why
it has to be macros.  I'm just utterly confused.

I was really hoping to be able to run through this set and get it ready
to be merged.  But it seems to still be seeing a *LOT* of change.
Should I wait another few weeks for this to settle down again?