On Tue, 2026-07-07 at 19:07 -0700, Rick Edgecombe wrote:

quoted

I think you can avoid the comment altogether in that case.

I don't think it removes the need for a comment. The point is if
tdx_supports_dynamic_pamt() is not supported. The comment should be more about
"why", than what the code does, right?

How about:

	if (ret)
		return ret;

	/*
	 * The kernel supports using TDX without Dynamic PAMT, so
	 * avoid reporting failure if it's not supported.
	 */
	if (tdx_supports_dynamic_pamt(sysinfo))
		ret = get_tdx_sys_info_tdmr_dpamt(&sysinfo->tdmr);

	return ret;

Actually this really stands out from the autogenerated code now, how about:

	/*
	 * The kernel supports using TDX without Dynamic PAMT, so
	 * avoid reporting failure if it's not supported.
	 */
	if (!ret && tdx_supports_dynamic_pamt(sysinfo))
		ret = get_tdx_sys_info_tdmr_dpamt(&sysinfo->tdmr);

It why-ifys the comment more, but only gently moves from the auto-generated
patterns.