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=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 0D82BC4332E for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:56:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D851320724 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 09:56:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="fSh4x7Ao" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727082AbgCSJ4v (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 05:56:51 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-74.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.74]:52190 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-74.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726864AbgCSJ4u (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 05:56:50 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1584611809; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=kjiT/f6j1dtJ0M+LrqpZMacX0jJNaJL+Lx9QWE3AlSg=; b=fSh4x7AoZzsFNvnuSQauolsTMIvaJi0OqKHCisL6zxAsmGTQntoYYO+X40tld652BnRJQv QYs148CCnWLzzAYzGYSNwT0ZxigRrWECxqfp2f74HxuKSD6UHkBeDKl54QfNxw94WSQZbT EAMZgWMZbabBTcPnCT+0nOn3Vbc2uxY= Received: from mail-wm1-f69.google.com (mail-wm1-f69.google.com [209.85.128.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-163-Yr-So8wMNIuQOaH1j0gyuw-1; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 05:56:47 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Yr-So8wMNIuQOaH1j0gyuw-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f69.google.com with SMTP id r23so491412wmn.3 for ; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 02:56:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=kjiT/f6j1dtJ0M+LrqpZMacX0jJNaJL+Lx9QWE3AlSg=; b=jEOEYWnu1L4eSJec2sOfR0/ZAwcMhx8doV0ymfZF6suLfk4ypofjBfpQU4B5WNVaXJ /QCDqAI+1bY76KA2yQVpMFrgACJgdLg+Qik3D7TBpovpfKPjkVVNSHABdoKtw1+3jaKY oRtbSiiwagNyTuF6lkSgGQBZ+Z0LI43b7vGM4OeQg0pl7ae5phm37KsPPeeqB9D2BKd+ FlNCPVelOvoa50pT7BJnfJDB+FU0H6/DKj5odNzxG+sLZPDp1IhAayUvsD1y97Ip5nni 4sxCxMjZu2nlfOmHarwGMJAZqRjtRr6/xlg5DX70Vpa3TNgBxGate/JTlsrDiznLk+xb sO3g== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ0w47DhQy+J1cqx0S6eRJajjqEhlzvmHhgC4Qi2wBXLArDyKFyr OwyIhmfebX+fDU5vgVEehoH1Ta4WTD7ef+ZN153elMMehWYWJYqvW0YjcXCv2fHwPbBNchTvQU+ yEHYboxDxr4EK X-Received: by 2002:a1c:26c4:: with SMTP id m187mr2689733wmm.43.1584611805753; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 02:56:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtkzGOheVy9K8FX3czGp3WTrtHBqz4ZF32AJjg1xM5abjrG7P+JO8k413ESfXBAeQwhPTJBeg== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:26c4:: with SMTP id m187mr2689721wmm.43.1584611805546; Thu, 19 Mar 2020 02:56:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.58] ([151.21.15.43]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k133sm2590796wma.11.2020.03.19.02.56.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Mar 2020 02:56:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 2/8] nVMX: Refactor VM-Entry "failure" struct into "result" To: Krish Sadhukhan , Sean Christopherson Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org References: <20200312232745.884-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> <20200312232745.884-3-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> <5296f778-59d8-b402-b1ed-cea5f3a56eb4@oracle.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <53f6926e-f771-fa96-6641-1a54c1f4843f@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 10:56:43 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5296f778-59d8-b402-b1ed-cea5f3a56eb4@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org 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