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 DC8A8C433FE for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 05:18:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A12C86112E for ; Thu, 4 Nov 2021 05:18:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230301AbhKDFUo (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2021 01:20:44 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:60382 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230011AbhKDFUm (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Nov 2021 01:20:42 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-x231.google.com (mail-lj1-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::231]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1CE6C06127A for ; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 22:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x231.google.com with SMTP id 1so7576018ljv.2 for ; Wed, 03 Nov 2021 22:18:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1i2ArK/DuUH+8zzvoUDR5kWhCGaxJs+6ozvmTXq3KK8=; b=UHIbzIzQ1BtxF5gJfTpEOGoz5NyoOTK6Ll+Tu1A5W4GCmzV2IKgvn53W9V0mG2Uap5 PoDvCYiy4SsEZkkADAiH4AwUgZ2J3tv8y09mTPK3nk4gRy4yreS9YE8RcGXNs6h44LGZ jKvtMxAoE0x3RBpBKTj+1v17lGc4Drx8Oc8v0gVSjiYM+x6EuE/4IEKNPCcog6eeyDHe cv/5PEZ8ERI8lOiPS/waDl1su7Rmy3LVo3vLz5l39vot+RwJneQ6saFjzl6zTSHQrr4a dsD/3BVbAE5nk8fKATtycJODmWyHcLmGz8qZUkjrq0EsjT7eZMNHG3MBCFnitxvIinoL xjmQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1i2ArK/DuUH+8zzvoUDR5kWhCGaxJs+6ozvmTXq3KK8=; b=V9qnyuZdrOYmeNrWLk+3iMULHx3+2UV/U7evksssQpU0FyOZSSwF8BW+E5ceTY8Kut kVTs5UDBZxGCw6OcqDDsFhnxyeNTNAy9U05EEUzVS5v47bAAFz8GxnzkxXJM/gAjCz9u dCBz6n1hcORRsJceiVGI7q2S6dCmXe5KqBJTIoGSB8Oxc3B7TGMrT1A9cxSxy96weQ0K 0L4X7qoeX8BAPqciS3WohxqKzwrjFd5TM9piC/KbOKC2oGU0U3EypmS7Vwm2VedG5L83 dr4NXipBjXyzcWfY4SGw0mEl4bgwaI1zvzbOnNvgjAOAC7yCqUnpJPosa0I8vTuj+D0G fMHg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532o3q7lZA5T7tprfdI2x+3Zi9Gu+mhmmZ9JnumTO5Ftxr0YamEM TEZa7EH8QgLDwO+S3VSouhPivrRM1jKty14Aa76hlg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzQZSoC4A3NWrvzR7sdaoKUiV/q5Xy3qUQi0/b+nqASUfy2A97b28r0pC9HLcxKCyMSUDkX8eI3sOT/96BONDc= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:bf06:: with SMTP id c6mr50574945ljr.405.1636003082804; Wed, 03 Nov 2021 22:18:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211103205911.1253463-1-vipinsh@google.com> <20211103205911.1253463-3-vipinsh@google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Vipin Sharma Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 22:17:26 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] KVM: Move INVPCID type check from vmx and svm to the common kvm_handle_invpcid() To: Sean Christopherson Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, jmattson@google.com, dmatlack@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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. Thanks Vipin