[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 9 Sep 2021 15:32:21 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] KVM: SVM: Get rid of *ghcb_msr_bits() functions
On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 09:12:10PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 22, 2021, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > case GHCB_MSR_TERM_REQ: {
> > u64 reason_set, reason_code;
> >
> > - reason_set = get_ghcb_msr_bits(svm,
> > - GHCB_MSR_TERM_REASON_SET_MASK,
> > - GHCB_MSR_TERM_REASON_SET_POS);
> > - reason_code = get_ghcb_msr_bits(svm,
> > - GHCB_MSR_TERM_REASON_MASK,
> > - GHCB_MSR_TERM_REASON_POS);
> > + reason_set = GHCB_MSR_TERM_REASON_SET(control->ghcb_gpa);
> > + reason_code = GHCB_MSR_TERM_REASON(control->ghcb_gpa);
> > +
> > pr_info("SEV-ES guest requested termination: %#llx:%#llx\n",
> > reason_set, reason_code);
> > +
> > fallthrough;
>
> Not related to this patch, but why use fallthrough and more importantly, why is
> this an -EINVAL return? Why wouldn't KVM forward the request to userspace instead
> of returning an opaque -EINVAL?
I guess it is to signal an error condition up the call-chain to get the
guest terminated, like requested.
Regards,
Joerg
Powered by blists - more mailing lists