Re: [PATCH v2 17/21] x86/virt/seamldr: Install a new TDX Module

[Chao Gao]

On Thu, Jan 15, 2026 at 02:15:31PM +0800, Xu Yilun wrote:
>>  static int do_seamldr_install_module(void *params)
>>  {
>> +	struct tdx_module_args args = { .rcx = __pa(params) };
>
>Is it better we put the definition, or at least the value assignment in
>case TDP_CPU_INSTALL? This pattern always appears here for a seamcall
>wrapper but this function is far more complex than that.
>
>And the .rcx = __pa(params) also confuse me a bit. Better we name it
>e.g. seamldr_params which looks reasonable for seamcall arguments.

Sounds good. I will do the following changes:

diff --git a/arch/x86/virt/vmx/tdx/seamldr.c b/arch/x86/virt/vmx/tdx/seamldr.c
index a0b59d6c53c9..f2933c7e3852 100644
--- a/arch/x86/virt/vmx/tdx/seamldr.c
+++ b/arch/x86/virt/vmx/tdx/seamldr.c
@@ -313,10 +313,10 @@ static void print_update_failure_message(void)
  * See multi_cpu_stop() from where this multi-cpu state-machine was
  * adopted, and the rationale for touch_nmi_watchdog()
  */
-static int do_seamldr_install_module(void *params)
+static int do_seamldr_install_module(void *seamldr_params)
 {
-	struct tdx_module_args args = { .rcx = __pa(params) };
	enum tdp_state newstate, curstate = TDP_START;
+	struct tdx_module_args args = {};
	int cpu = smp_processor_id();
	bool primary;
	int ret = 0;
@@ -336,6 +336,7 @@ static int do_seamldr_install_module(void *params)
					ret = tdx_module_shutdown();
				break;
			case TDP_CPU_INSTALL:
+				args.rcx = __pa(seamldr_params);
				scoped_guard(raw_spinlock, &seamldr_lock)
					ret = seamldr_call(P_SEAMLDR_INSTALL, &args);
				break;