linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] KVM: x86: Add return value to kvm

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:18:18 +0200
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To:     Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rkrcmar@...hat.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
        xiaoguangrong@...cent.com, joro@...tes.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] KVM: x86: Add return value to kvm_cpuid().

On 17/08/2017 14:33, Yu Zhang wrote:
>>>>
>>>> +enum {
>>>> +    NO_CHECK_LIMIT = 0,
>>>> +    CHECK_LIMIT = 1,
>>>> +};
>>> emulate.c should not include cpuid.h.  The argument can be simply a
>>> bool, though.
>>
>> Thanks, Paolo.
>> So we just use true/false in emulate.c & svm.c, is this OK?

I would use true/false everywhere.

>> BTW could you please
> Sorry for the unfinished line. I was wondering, why can't emulate.c
> include cpuid.h?

The emulator should be separate from the rest of KVM, in principle it
could be used by userspace too.  So its interface should be as limited
as possible.

Paolo