Re: [PATCH REGRESSION-FIX] x86/paravirt: Move halt paravirt calls under CONFIG_PARAVIRT

[Vishal Annapurve]

> ...
> 6.12.23 fails to build with the following error if CONFIG_XEN_PV is
> not set:
>
> arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c: In function ‘tdx_early_init’:
> arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c:1080:19: error: ‘struct pv_irq_ops’ has no member
> named ‘safe_halt’
>  1080 |         pv_ops.irq.safe_halt = tdx_safe_halt;
>       |                   ^
> arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c:1081:19: error: ‘struct pv_irq_ops’ has no member
> named ‘halt’
>  1081 |         pv_ops.irq.halt = tdx_halt;
>       |                   ^
>
> This is because XEN_PV selects PARAVIRT_XXL, and 'safe_halt' and
> 'halt' are only defined for pv_irq_ops if PARAVIRT_XXL is defined.
>
> The build breakage was introduced in 6.12.23 by stable commit
> 805e3ce5e0e3 which is a backport of 9f98a4f4e721 ("x86/tdx: Fix
> arch_safe_halt() execution for TDX VMs").
>
> Consider picking up upstream commit 22cc5ca5de52 ("x86/paravirt:
> Move halt paravirt calls under CONFIG_PARAVIRT") for stable 6.12.y
> which fixes the build regression by moving 'safe_halt' and 'halt'
> out from under the PARAVIRT_XXL config.
>
> This patch is 22cc5ca5de52 backported to 6.12.23.  There were a
> couple of merge conflicts due to the missing upstream commits below:
>

Thanks Brett for looking into this. I have posted a similar patch [1]
and I see that the issue you reported is also being discussed already
[2].

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20250408132341.4175633-1-vannapurve@xxxxxxxxxx/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20250410180423.GA3430900@ax162/