[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7bac31c8-a008-8223-0ed5-9c25012e380a@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 16:45:25 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Cc: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>, Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 12/34] KVM: SVM: Add initial support for a VMGEXIT
VMEXIT
On 10/12/20 18:09, Tom Lendacky wrote:
> @@ -3184,6 +3186,8 @@ static int svm_invoke_exit_handler(struct vcpu_svm *svm, u64 exit_code)
> return halt_interception(svm);
> else if (exit_code == SVM_EXIT_NPF)
> return npf_interception(svm);
> + else if (exit_code == SVM_EXIT_VMGEXIT)
> + return sev_handle_vmgexit(svm);
Are these common enough to warrant putting them in this short list?
Paolo
> #endif
> return svm_exit_handlers[exit_code](svm);
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists