[PATCHv10 06/18] x86/mm: Make x86_platform.guest.enc_status_change_*() return errno

[Borislav Petkov]

On Tue, Apr 09, 2024 at 02:29:58PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> TDX is going to have more than one reason to fail
> enc_status_change_prepare().
> 
> Change the callback to return errno instead of assuming -EIO;
> enc_status_change_finish() changed too to keep the interface symmetric.

"Change enc_status_change_finish() too... "

"Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz"
instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed xyzzy
to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change
its behaviour."

You should know this by now...

> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov at linux.intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen at intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Kai Huang <kai.huang at intel.com>
> Tested-by: Tao Liu <ltao at redhat.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c         | 20 +++++++++++---------
>  arch/x86/hyperv/ivm.c           | 22 ++++++++++------------
>  arch/x86/include/asm/x86_init.h |  4 ++--
>  arch/x86/kernel/x86_init.c      |  4 ++--
>  arch/x86/mm/mem_encrypt_amd.c   |  8 ++++----
>  arch/x86/mm/pat/set_memory.c    |  8 +++++---
>  6 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)

Another thing you should long know by now: get_maintainer.pl. You do
know that when you send a patch which touches multiple different
"places", you run it through get_maintainer.pl to get some hints as to
who to CC, right?

Because you're touching HyperV code and yet none of the HyperV folks are
CCed.

Do I need to give you the spiel I give to kernel newbies? :)

Lemme Cc them for you now.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette