diff for duplicates of <Y3RDPOerOIf6SwI0@google.com>

diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt
index 9fa2422..543ea15 100644
--- a/a/1.txt
+++ b/N1/1.txt
@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ On Tue, Nov 15, 2022, Huang, Kai wrote:
 > > +	}
 > > +
 > > +	if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MSR_IA32_FEAT_CTL) ||
-> > +	??? !boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_VMX)) {
+> > +	    !boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_VMX)) {
 > > +		pr_err("VMX not enabled in MSR_IA32_FEAT_CTL\n");
 > > +		return false;
 > > +	}
@@ -16,21 +16,25 @@ On Tue, Nov 15, 2022, Huang, Kai wrote:
 > > +	return true;
 > > +}
 > > +
-> > ?static int __init vmx_check_processor_compat(void)
-> > ?{
-> > ?	struct vmcs_config vmcs_conf;
-> > ?	struct vmx_capability vmx_cap;
-> > ?
+> >  static int __init vmx_check_processor_compat(void)
+> >  {
+> >  	struct vmcs_config vmcs_conf;
+> >  	struct vmx_capability vmx_cap;
+> >  
 > > -	if (!this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MSR_IA32_FEAT_CTL) ||
-> > -	??? !this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_VMX)) {
+> > -	    !this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_VMX)) {
 > > -		pr_err("VMX is disabled on CPU %d\n", smp_processor_id());
 > > +	if (!kvm_is_vmx_supported())
-> > ?		return -EIO;
+> >  		return -EIO;
 > > -	}
-> > ?
+> >  
 > 
 > Looks there's a functional change here -- the old code checks local cpu's
 > feature bits but the new code always checks bsp's feature bits.  Should have no
 > problem I think, though.
 
 Ouch.  The bad check will defeat the purpose of doing compat checks.  Nice catch!
+_______________________________________________
+kvmarm mailing list
+kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
+https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest
index 370e7e7..475a702 100644
--- a/a/content_digest
+++ b/N1/content_digest
@@ -2,9 +2,44 @@
  "ref\020221102231911.3107438-34-seanjc@google.com\0"
  "ref\095c3cce88560024566f3b4b0061ca7e62a8a4286.camel@intel.com\0"
  "From\0Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>\0"
- "Subject\0[PATCH 33/44] KVM: x86: Do VMX/SVM support checks directly in vendor code\0"
+ "Subject\0Re: [PATCH 33/44] KVM: x86: Do VMX/SVM support checks directly in vendor code\0"
  "Date\0Wed, 16 Nov 2022 01:56:12 +0000\0"
- "To\0kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org\0"
+ "To\0Huang"
+ " Kai <kai.huang@intel.com>\0"
+ "Cc\0mjrosato@linux.ibm.com <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>"
+  david@redhat.com <david@redhat.com>
+  Yao
+  Yuan <yuan.yao@intel.com>
+  linux-mips@vger.kernel.org <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>
+  linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>
+  imbrenda@linux.ibm.com <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>
+  kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu <kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu>
+  linux-s390@vger.kernel.org <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>
+  frankja@linux.ibm.com <frankja@linux.ibm.com>
+  mpe@ellerman.id.au <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
+  chenhuacai@kernel.org <chenhuacai@kernel.org>
+  aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>
+  borntraeger@linux.ibm.com <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
+  Gao
+  Chao <chao.gao@intel.com>
+  farman@linux.ibm.com <farman@linux.ibm.com>
+  aou@eecs.berkeley.edu <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>
+  kvm@vger.kernel.org <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
+  paul.walmsley@sifive.com <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>
+  kvmarm@lists.linux.dev <kvmarm@lists.linux.dev>
+  tglx@linutronix.de <tglx@linutronix.de>
+  linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
+  Yamahata
+  Isaku <isaku.yamahata@intel.com>
+  atishp@atishpatra.org <atishp@atishpatra.org>
+  farosas@linux.ibm.com <farosas@linux.ibm.com>
+  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
+  palmer@dabbelt.com <palmer@dabbelt.com>
+  kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org <kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org>
+  maz@kernel.org <maz@kernel.org>
+  pbonzini@redhat.com <pbonzini@redhat.com>
+  vkuznets@redhat.com <vkuznets@redhat.com>
+ " linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>\0"
  "\00:1\0"
  "b\0"
  "On Tue, Nov 15, 2022, Huang, Kai wrote:\n"
@@ -17,7 +52,7 @@
  "> > +\t}\n"
  "> > +\n"
  "> > +\tif (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MSR_IA32_FEAT_CTL) ||\n"
- "> > +\t??? !boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_VMX)) {\n"
+ "> > +\t\302\240\302\240\302\240 !boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_VMX)) {\n"
  "> > +\t\tpr_err(\"VMX not enabled in MSR_IA32_FEAT_CTL\\n\");\n"
  "> > +\t\treturn false;\n"
  "> > +\t}\n"
@@ -25,23 +60,27 @@
  "> > +\treturn true;\n"
  "> > +}\n"
  "> > +\n"
- "> > ?static int __init vmx_check_processor_compat(void)\n"
- "> > ?{\n"
- "> > ?\tstruct vmcs_config vmcs_conf;\n"
- "> > ?\tstruct vmx_capability vmx_cap;\n"
- "> > ?\n"
+ "> > \302\240static int __init vmx_check_processor_compat(void)\n"
+ "> > \302\240{\n"
+ "> > \302\240\tstruct vmcs_config vmcs_conf;\n"
+ "> > \302\240\tstruct vmx_capability vmx_cap;\n"
+ "> > \302\240\n"
  "> > -\tif (!this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MSR_IA32_FEAT_CTL) ||\n"
- "> > -\t??? !this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_VMX)) {\n"
+ "> > -\t\302\240\302\240\302\240 !this_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_VMX)) {\n"
  "> > -\t\tpr_err(\"VMX is disabled on CPU %d\\n\", smp_processor_id());\n"
  "> > +\tif (!kvm_is_vmx_supported())\n"
- "> > ?\t\treturn -EIO;\n"
+ "> > \302\240\t\treturn -EIO;\n"
  "> > -\t}\n"
- "> > ?\n"
+ "> > \302\240\n"
  "> \n"
  "> Looks there's a functional change here -- the old code checks local cpu's\n"
  "> feature bits but the new code always checks bsp's feature bits.  Should have no\n"
  "> problem I think, though.\n"
  "\n"
- Ouch.  The bad check will defeat the purpose of doing compat checks.  Nice catch!
+ "Ouch.  The bad check will defeat the purpose of doing compat checks.  Nice catch!\n"
+ "_______________________________________________\n"
+ "kvmarm mailing list\n"
+ "kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu\n"
+ https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
 
-65fdf2a7b49ddd3876f5de7ed503856fc0e5db33684a71b07b4db72cb4a83315
+9488b4b9d704c9a94cb7dcacd68c98ce2145de23aeb17705774161c1932d6a95
