Re: [PATCH v19 030/130] KVM: TDX: Add helper functions to print TDX SEAMCALL error

[Huang, Kai]

> Does it make sense?
>
> void pr_tdx_error(u64 op, u64 error_code)
> {
>          pr_err_ratelimited("SEAMCALL (0x%016llx) failed: 0x%016llx\n",
>                             op, error_code);
> }

Should we also have a _ret version?

void pr_seamcall_err(u64 op, u64 err)
{
	/* A comment to explain why using the _ratelimited() version? */
	pr_err_ratelimited(...);
}

void pr_seamcall_err_ret(u64 op, u64 err, struct tdx_module_args *arg)
{
	pr_err_seamcall(op, err);
	
	pr_err_ratelimited(...);
}

(Hmm... if you look at the tdx.c in TDX host, there's similar code 
there, and again, it was a little bit annoying when I did that..)

Again, if we just use seamcall_ret() for ALL SEAMCALLs except VP.ENTER, 
we can simply have one..

> void pr_tdx_sept_error(u64 op, u64 error_code, const union tdx_sept_entry *entry,
> 		       const union tdx_sept_level_state *level_state)
> {
> #define MSG \
>          "SEAMCALL (0x%016llx) failed: 0x%016llx entry 0x%016llx level_state 0x%016llx\n"
>          pr_err_ratelimited(MSG, op, error_code, entry->raw, level_state->raw);
> }

A higher-level wrapper to print SEPT error is fine to me, but do it in a 
separate patch.