[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7012fd88-5590-e50d-cee2-d14fb54ce742@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 00:56:32 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>
Cc: Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>,
Junaid Shahid <junaids@...gle.com>,
Liran Alon <liran.alon@...cle.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
John Haxby <john.haxby@...cle.com>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/37] KVM: x86: Export kvm_propagate_fault() (as
kvm_inject_emulated_page_fault)
On 23/03/20 17:24, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> We don't seem to use the return value a lot, actually,
>> inject_emulated_exception() seems to be the only one, the rest just call
>> it without checking the return value. Judging by the new name, I'd guess
>> that the function returns whether it was able to inject the exception or
>> not but this doesn't seem to be the case. My suggestion would then be to
>> make it return 'void' and return 'fault->nested_page_fault' separately
>> in inject_emulated_exception().
> Oooh, I like that idea. The return from the common helper also confuses me
> every time I look at it.
>
Separate patch, please. I'm not sure it makes a great difference though.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists