From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Krish Sadhukhan <krish.sadhukhan@oracle.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 2/8] nVMX: Refactor VM-Entry "failure" struct into "result"
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 10:56:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53f6926e-f771-fa96-6641-1a54c1f4843f@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5296f778-59d8-b402-b1ed-cea5f3a56eb4@oracle.com>
On 19/03/20 00:40, Krish Sadhukhan wrote:
>>
>> + /* Did the test attempt vmlaunch or vmresume? */
>> + bool vmlaunch;
>> + /* Did the instruction VM-Fail? */
>> + bool vm_fail;
>
>
> I still like the old name, "failure_early". To me, "vm_fail" and
> "failed_vmentry" sound similar and confusing.
>
> The SDM calls this type of failure as "early failure" which is denoted
> by an (instruction) error number, in order to distinguish it from the
> failure that happens during guest state checking/loading. So, probably a
> better naming is "vm_early_failure" or "vm_fail_early". Or may be,
> "vm_instr_error" ?
This is actually what the SDM calls VMfailValid (we should never get to
VMfailInvalid in these tests), so vm_fail is appropriate.
failed_vmentry is what the SDM calls "VM-entry failure".
I agree that the names are similar and confusing, but there's some value
in keeping them close to the SDM.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-19 9:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-12 23:27 [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 0/8] nVMX: Clean up __enter_guest() and co Sean Christopherson
2020-03-12 23:27 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 1/8] nVMX: Eliminate superfluous entry_failure_handler() wrapper Sean Christopherson
2020-03-12 23:27 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 2/8] nVMX: Refactor VM-Entry "failure" struct into "result" Sean Christopherson
2020-03-18 23:40 ` Krish Sadhukhan
2020-03-19 9:56 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2020-03-12 23:27 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 3/8] nVMX: Consolidate non-canonical code in test_canonical() Sean Christopherson
2020-03-12 23:27 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 4/8] nVMX: Drop redundant check for guest termination Sean Christopherson
2020-03-12 23:27 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 5/8] nVMX: Expose __enter_guest() and consolidate guest state test code Sean Christopherson
2020-03-12 23:27 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 6/8] nVMX: Pass exit reason union to v1 exit handlers Sean Christopherson
2020-03-12 23:27 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 7/8] nVMX: Pass exit reason union to is_hypercall() Sean Christopherson
2020-03-12 23:27 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 8/8] nVMX: Pass exit reason enum to print_vmexit_info() Sean Christopherson
2020-03-14 10:35 ` [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 0/8] nVMX: Clean up __enter_guest() and co Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=53f6926e-f771-fa96-6641-1a54c1f4843f@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=krish.sadhukhan@oracle.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).