[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 13:29:28 +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=A+Kqgcn4yyNtyr0dF1EqlDuMFZer1dLgbP+SLRTi3Z8=; b=gMoI4o4LOdOkCJf69fmJk4FwdmnqmglLsApj8HMX5t2FR5C8Wz5yF3lAn/S/WwjC6tcTYxU41w2LCvGIn8VXsUF8mGj/erDO6V7W1RAG7o0AaMidGlnmOQex30c/u03yC9KnHmFJbmydu7f5YfpGU9MdV6yowoPSklDHfmZElMkkJXxX8smGEKlH6dLaupQ52iqxrlLMS2I0sZFd/JcO5FvOr8K/jBBD5I4FtTq2b5u1uAs8m0QPtiX1KwJ/kvh4VZ7orsmGvKMufIMgl0vo6dSV3Iy57SlTtOZUJ3FaVWp0YVV8j83OxbrAhAL+LfYPl7nC4CCvr9X3vb5sOqTmQw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Xo/nmgehQd3K8GeZQeYb75524r4DlFwDvxsI0UWTXgtB/2Cm05o9dvY10CeecHR5F6a4ll8wvosWeBtKYvhbW38sfz6T60y+K86/MyNGBrddWM6QzAuM6XiN/Cs4bVqX0C58YW3FSS9ojMkesHwtkqxxfIXOQ/BOTiqnseohYYuxmuQOVNY9NFxsZdVE6E2irQPQEvdBay/WGSILX2y/RtTaHqRhZ2/LjH8uc/W+ywBZhV4uipEwYNAt6jTWNaiM1+HyXddaE1dt8gMBigiDBAR23dhssR8k2SIt5GFqpqGdtHvVnFLivOw7UAHmcO4vkGuKaXljIviybDhGzNc3zQ==
- 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 12:29:35 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 23.02.2023 13:28, Jan Beulich wrote:
> 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 ...
Argh, should have looked at your next patch ...
Jan
|
