Comment in __tdx_hypercall() points that RAX==0 indicates TDVMCALL
failure which is opposite of the truth: RAX==0 is success.
Fix the comment. No functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <[email protected]>
---
arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdcall.S | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdcall.S b/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdcall.S
index f9eb1134f22d..74b108e94a0d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdcall.S
+++ b/arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdcall.S
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(__tdx_hypercall)
tdcall
/*
- * RAX==0 indicates a failure of the TDVMCALL mechanism itself and that
+ * RAX!=0 indicates a failure of the TDVMCALL mechanism itself and that
* something has gone horribly wrong with the TDX module.
*
* The return status of the hypercall operation is in a separate
--
2.38.2