Re: [RFC PATCH 11/20] x86/virt/seamldr: Abort updates if errors occurred midway

[Nikolay Borisov]

On 5/23/25 12:52, Chao Gao wrote:
> The update process is divided into multiple stages, each of which may
> encounter failures. However, the current state machine for updates proceeds
> to the next stage regardless of errors.
>
> Continuing updates when errors occur midway is pointless.
>
> Implement a mechanism that transitions directly to the final stage,
> effectively aborting the update and skipping all remaining stages when an
> error is detected.
>
> This is in preparation for adding the first stage that may fail.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Farrah Chen <farrah.chen@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   arch/x86/virt/vmx/tdx/seamldr.c | 17 +++++++++++++++--
>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/virt/vmx/tdx/seamldr.c b/arch/x86/virt/vmx/tdx/seamldr.c
> index 01dc2b0bc4a5..9d0d37a92bfd 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/virt/vmx/tdx/seamldr.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/virt/vmx/tdx/seamldr.c
> @@ -247,6 +247,7 @@ enum tdp_state {
>   static struct {
>   	enum tdp_state state;
>   	atomic_t thread_ack;
> +	atomic_t failed;
>   } tdp_data;
>   
>   static void set_state(enum tdp_state state)
> @@ -261,8 +262,16 @@ static void set_state(enum tdp_state state)
>   /* Last one to ack a state moves to the next state. */
>   static void ack_state(void)
>   {
> -	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&tdp_data.thread_ack))
> -		set_state(tdp_data.state + 1);
> +	if (atomic_dec_and_test(&tdp_data.thread_ack)) {
> +		/*
> +		 * If an error occurred, abort the update by skipping to
> +		 * the final state
> +		 */
> +		if (atomic_read(&tdp_data.failed))
> +			set_state(TDP_DONE);
> +		else
> +			set_state(tdp_data.state + 1);
> +	}
>   }
>   
>   /*
> @@ -285,6 +294,9 @@ static int do_seamldr_install_module(void *params)
>   			default:
>   				break;
>   			}
> +
> +			if (ret)
> +				atomic_inc(&tdp_data.failed);

Should there be some explicit ordering requirement between setting an 
error and reading it in ack_state by a different CPU?


 < snip>