RE: [RFC PATCH 06/15] virt: tdx-guest: Support TDI bind and unbind operations

Next message: David Hildenbrand (Arm): "Re: [PATCH 1/8] mm/gup: break out gup_fill_pages() helper"
Previous message: Fuad Tabba: "[PATCH 0/3] KVM: arm64: Stop stage-2 teardown scaling with the IPA size"
In reply to: Edgecombe, Rick P: "Re: [RFC PATCH 06/15] virt: tdx-guest: Support TDI bind and unbind operations"
Next in thread: Edgecombe, Rick P: "Re: [RFC PATCH 06/15] virt: tdx-guest: Support TDI bind and unbind operations"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

From: Duan, Zhenzhong

Date: Tue Nov 03 2026 - 04:07:11 EST

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Edgecombe, Rick P <rick.p.edgecombe@xxxxxxxxx>
>On Thu, 2026-10-29 at 03:26 +0000, Duan, Zhenzhong wrote:
>> I want to discuss this further.
>>
>> If the TSM driver successfully locks a device but later fails to unlock
>it,
>
>Can you explain some concrete scenarios where this would happen? We can
>think
>about whether it is required for an initial minimal set that does something
>useful.

I can think of some rare cases: the TDCM hypercall may return an error(e.g., a messing VMM or TDI device firmware), or TDCM hypercall polling timeout(e.g., heavy load in host).