[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] x86/vmx: Correct the declaration of vmx_asm_vmexit_handler()
- To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 13:28:21 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=4+Vr6wRiH3xVAoXF8GuaPmDakIH0DpKdCTBHphn9N3w=; b=KM+04DyDesxwZFMjbjPq4pFIhLIp783PkbhAGHmj7uJU+KAaYB8YX8/oMGStvk0snNvm19ah2AceR4rInJe5QTQrgpigAZ1LDmDfacV05/94jbGK29qJIyzTg3R5s5iGvSSBnUenvpnL2tFIDpbjgUYFNlZqFpZuoW/gGPFlpfqOEBxFqndgutIUsI1RlNxO/eb9Chnnmu+M7V/U2oaDJrNKlkavNh2A8GvSvmO3kX67Algju0bGUkOG+Nep9VPK3bPYxFWJqzEcRtNZmxM442vHlR72DzXTb1oCPO52+PBnqS5m9bYpJK67IhspQlb7R0r+w1A18EMHUnmvBCKkqg==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=gIMq1iyT88GYH/mT6gej5LR1oP6K5SiRyN+MmffOtbk0AtG8zyMk6jtXDrh7wxlrPUt8Ufz7WuIAVW2WlJ8pwpzQUt9dP+PRPdZFG0Jm1fevBtnMRimJD9bGNVvYDB+nin44IbppM15uQVNF+y9KdIIJZPkX3eQXAVuWdwUxYdIfw2NTYDNwJf9CDnfOQIRbXxQvQLFbtt7n1EVt4+Tlbs2mS0mUNnADrxJQhRivow/sMdz/ZPxL6n8ncyI2oMuRVFlY4Y5TG26XqXQCAFXHnXdQKLyKvHTbQsCHmGdUE6FDK34pX4y7cUOyr7r30emt00iTM5R9bWpZJ15koxGiHQ==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalodowa@xxxxxxxxx>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 23 Feb 2023 12:28:58 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 23.02.2023 13:07, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Taking struct cpu_user_regs as a full object is bogus, and while what was
> probably meant was to take a struct cpu_user_regs pointer, that's still wrong.
>
> This isn't a function; its an address stored in the VMCS that the CPU resumes
> from on VMExit, meaning that it doesn't conform to a normal C API/ABI.
>
> Annotate it with `nocall`, and move the declaration into vmcs.c next to its
> sole user.
>
> Fixes: 9c3118a82523 ("bitkeeper revision 1.1159.1.483
> (41c0c417XYObowWqbfqU0cdLx30C9w)")
> `-> "Initial Intel VMX support"
> Reported-by: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
Since I had to look up what exactly "nocall" expands to, I'm wondering
whether it really is still the case that Clang doesn't support the error
attribute ...
Jan
|
