[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YWYeJ9TtfRwBk/5D@google.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2021 23:45:43 +0000
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: David Edmondson <david.edmondson@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/4] KVM: x86: Clarify the kvm_run.emulation_failure
structure layout
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021, David Edmondson wrote:
> Until more flags for kvm_run.emulation_failure flags are defined, it
> is undetermined whether new payload elements corresponding to those
> flags will be additive or alternative. As a hint to userspace that an
> alternative is possible, wrap the current payload elements in a union.
>
> Suggested-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Edmondson <david.edmondson@...cle.com>
> ---
To complete the set... :-)
Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists