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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28736C4332F for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 10:03:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230000AbiLPKDu (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Dec 2022 05:03:50 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46436 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230094AbiLPKDo (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Dec 2022 05:03:44 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A45834A056; Fri, 16 Dec 2022 02:03:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1671185023; x=1702721023; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=iL3v9W9JsUQY9SxcVHN0UWhfZb6jDPXHg3+Oshg1GJM=; b=JfPhvIk5wlmQDwv/majiT5crTI5bBFLGduhx1/X3/be4IRuf8n0Oy7SW QLdbWBGElA4B7vfzdjc9QmadiAxtYMOlg6lBNqJeT6giMQtm3eB0/D/ct E2yQvuuo+milZUQCINpCxAdc3F0bC/JkxsV+t45vd24iWhocEiagSslv3 4cxpaXYT4QvljZMohAlmmIx5jAC3PdXy84wc6x8rhwfWEzwP+mWFIK/J4 auhslu31Woy38GdD71KJoCGjBK0rDrNT5incm3tfkDgRXiWmvRZm6JBsX cPemSsH9krJco+3LBvKfC2x+XhC/okGZP3LUxeuDUKfSFW19mHQYI0elo w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10562"; a="316575488" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,249,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="316575488" Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2022 01:59:30 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10562"; a="627516636" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,249,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="627516636" Received: from xintongc-mobl.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.249.168.175]) by orsmga006-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2022 01:59:25 -0800 Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 17:59:22 +0800 From: Yu Zhang To: Sean Christopherson Cc: Paolo Bonzini , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Aaron Lewis Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] KVM: nVMX: Fix 2nd exec controls override goofs Message-ID: <20221216095922.swvqp7olwr2rgpyc@linux.intel.com> References: <20221213062306.667649-1-seanjc@google.com> <20221214030037.4qz6v6fvfx6of32n@linux.intel.com> <20221215112436.2iqizpso5loeficn@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20171215 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org > > They're definitely not too trivial. This is just an especially rough time of > year for reviews, e.g. end of year corporate stuff, merge window, holidays, etc. > Glad to know that. Thanks! > Part of why I haven't provided reviews is that the patches _aren't_ super trivial, > e.g. I'm on the fence on whether mmu_is_direct() should take @vcpu or @mmu, and if > I vote to have it take @mmu, then that'll conflict with mmu_is_nested(). So I end > up staying silent until I can come back to it with fresh eyes to see if there's a > better alternative, or if I'm just being nitpicky. > Well, though I would prefer mmu_is_direct(), I appreciate for being considerate. We can discuss it later. :) B.R. Yu