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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 762B7C433F5 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 13:58:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59AB361168 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 13:58:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231332AbhKDOAl (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2021 10:00:41 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36520 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231252AbhKDOAk (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2021 10:00:40 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x529.google.com (mail-pg1-x529.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::529]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91D85C061714 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 06:58:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x529.google.com with SMTP id p17so5495878pgj.2 for ; Thu, 04 Nov 2021 06:58:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=J6SQdi7s3E5H+vjXCs1YEcND+ZzSy2UU02yujcY6scI=; b=f58CavIyrr1D8YaqKFXLcAEyOCA/u9zOjAozKpMPMggBTHgJd9TBxrLqKrJLrAcT0k ddBFw9ZKO8mJuQ/sLjbuENiR+uLPKbWwwo4ylv/b4QDTBZ0HL+P3nV9XD21iUmRD0gV2 c29Kl050tjsTBeYASnCeaoPOj80ZjOL2eI4vPbKJZvNfpPqgGt23IxBACH6Scc650Mps bojPWb0ibVrkQa6F0kW1Qsh50WGHtdSZ2+ybc45RFZc+pQ0Fvzg0TEsvWm1Yl4Z0cNej yLrKEnrCIGr12Ru+SLf+GYSYAFuy4EOA2IYy70mg32jBhuO2Hw+EWlvn4w8SlTrrLkDt 01mA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=J6SQdi7s3E5H+vjXCs1YEcND+ZzSy2UU02yujcY6scI=; b=2UcxLHH5ugUVqUw8gSyTfqCJ3t8+7QtuL38I87kBEgpZAsWwmCNYQz9A+q18FJftVz 4VAURqSrLXdOCudozkngPRIpvSUGUDbTRk7Lr4wD1op6CxZETSuwjq/ba6rcLDekT5OV kIch4dLJWfGUNUrv6pPlNi5BwcOMguC7bAbPuM6UdmlIrmDl1A6daAh/k+p70RdmFG5r VPpvABtHp07bQ0FuExlx6ejb4wyY+1C4iHbd7YRxNvCKKm8umg6oyxVoAUqzhQvh0RAa QF6FenV7KIyYEVPlK+zVw98Rvs0zEU+njr8xVc2LG3fYEYnW3fYZI4hrxdWhyVCSsQNt JIpQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532P1tjJY2dYSyyMkSfWkuLE1w0B+Ckfp153CI4xFmRo9RQ4yXoj WFtziNtw+6jEt4qo8120VRhTEg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyzkYr/yQgMwXyO/ROZ3931wThHZNOvnagfd1BHgc6gzK3Y76yRyb6ViaO5gg3NqkHVJsxFTg== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8755:0:b0:494:67a6:1c84 with SMTP id g21-20020aa78755000000b0049467a61c84mr3223903pfo.26.1636034281752; Thu, 04 Nov 2021 06:58:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (157.214.185.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.185.214.157]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v12sm4109756pjs.0.2021.11.04.06.58.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 04 Nov 2021 06:58:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2021 13:57:57 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: Vipin Sharma Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, jmattson@google.com, dmatlack@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] KVM: Move INVPCID type check from vmx and svm to the common kvm_handle_invpcid() Message-ID: References: <20211103205911.1253463-1-vipinsh@google.com> <20211103205911.1253463-3-vipinsh@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 03, 2021, Vipin Sharma wrote: > On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 4:20 PM Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 03, 2021, Vipin Sharma wrote: > > > Handle #GP on INVPCID due to an invalid type in the common switch > > > statement instead of relying on the callers (VMX and SVM) to manually > > > validate the type. > > > > > > Unlike INVVPID and INVEPT, INVPCID is not explicitly documented to check > > > the type before reading the operand from memory, so deferring the > > > type validity check until after that point is architecturally allowed. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Vipin Sharma > > > --- > > > > For future reference, a R-b that comes with qualifiers can be carried so long as > > the issues raised by the reviewer are addressed. Obviously it can be somewhat > > subjective, but common sense usually goes a long ways, and most reviewers won't > > be too grumpy about mistakes so long as you had good intentions and remedy any > > mistakes. And if you're in doubt, you can always add a blurb in the cover letter > > or ignored part of the patch to explicitly confirm that it was ok to add the tag, > > e.g. "Sean, I added your Reviewed-by in patch 02 after fixing the changelog, let > > me know if that's not what you intended". > > > > Thanks! > > > > Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson > > I was not sure if I can add R-b as it was only for the code and not > changelog. Good to know that I can ask such things in the cover letter > or the ignored part of the patch. Ah, that's my bad, that was indeed a very confusing way to phrase my contingent review.