From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C93A2C433E0 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:19:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9958421D90 for ; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:19:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=citrix.com header.i=@citrix.com header.b="YTz8UlXS" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9958421D90 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=citrix.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jvIxs-0002jJ-Cw; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:19:12 +0000 Received: from all-amaz-eas1.inumbo.com ([34.197.232.57] helo=us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jvIxq-0002jD-Sd for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:19:10 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: d5ce9619-c5c3-11ea-92fb-12813bfff9fa Received: from esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (unknown [216.71.155.175]) by us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id d5ce9619-c5c3-11ea-92fb-12813bfff9fa; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:19:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1594725549; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=bmMPQd+N8T9YBrSTYgCcoOlLXK1DFjRkp+a//IvzCNQ=; b=YTz8UlXSGNV2OcXX/cvKYb15Ik22+D6TInVYEF82cjkWN0y5D+caPbX5 Bves7EjjyvVT+r0XEqHqAk8e22BwONqtH5PVf0FjlhIXndn2hg70rB353 bP8MEOTPLigTaWvd15e1P2YOMQaZ38/gl6+ROuTKAyyaXE7dc5dO4/EQH I=; Authentication-Results: esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none IronPort-SDR: dKvtN1W44Xs5OPJjtNdDWaeoDcRLea9VIVmnYr3g6VwRy0IdJIg9VyRU7czC6pkBts3fj5ptR/ elVIgypijoulLpE33wL6LdkUb3HLI/0Mg7/vQQBQ2SVrzMlE0gX5VhohOg9+X2n8bAZOoE44Sl jtjMcQT0QnbzDEgG4fEJDjWZBavMRBtTJx+5gHrI5aat7emVe438Oh1grqKsfVUTJBqz9qxNH9 7seSSqxxnd9vwZVTB0SUBxV01VHz0bZiwR7ZmI6jv7QwCfUeNRWKuRuuUGglz+a4Qs4FskQnOR 62A= X-SBRS: 2.7 X-MesageID: 22653112 X-Ironport-Server: esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,350,1589256000"; d="scan'208";a="22653112" Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 13:19:00 +0200 From: Roger Pau =?utf-8?B?TW9ubsOp?= To: Jan Beulich Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] x86/mce: bring hypercall subop compat checking in sync again Message-ID: <20200714111900.GI7191@Air-de-Roger> References: <5d53a2e3-716c-2213-96e5-9d37371c482c@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5d53a2e3-716c-2213-96e5-9d37371c482c@suse.com> X-ClientProxiedBy: AMSPEX02CAS01.citrite.net (10.69.22.112) To AMSPEX02CL02.citrite.net (10.69.22.126) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: George Dunlap , "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" , Paul Durrant , Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 12:26:54PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > Use a typedef in struct xen_mc also for the two subops "manually" > translated in the handler, just for consistency. No functional > change. I'm slightly puzzled by the fact that mc_fetch is marked as needs checking while mc_physcpuinfo is marked as needs translation, shouldn't both be marked as needing translation? (since both need to handle a guest pointer using XEN_GUEST_HANDLE) Thanks, Roger.