From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Ricardo Koller <ricarkol@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, maz@kernel.org,
kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
pbonzini@redhat.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: selftests: Rename vm_handle_exception in evmcs test
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2021 16:34:27 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YMDtk/Xyf/7wpIxx@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YL/q/IJ41gO6kTIF@google.com>
On Tue, Jun 08, 2021, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 09:26:54PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > The multiple layers of routing is also confusing and a bit hard to wade through
> > for the uninitiated. The whole thing can be made more straightfoward by doing
> > away with the intermediate routing, whacking ~50 lines of code in the process.
> > E.g. (definitely not functional code):
>
> This works but it would remove the ability to replace the default sync
> handler with something else, like a handler that can cover all possible
> ec values. In this case we would have to call
> vm_install_exception_handler_ec 64 times. On the other hand, the tests that
> we are planning don't seem to need it, so I will move on with the suggestion.
My objection to layering handlers is that it introduces ambiguity regarding
ordering and override functionality, e.g. if a test overrides both the "default"
handler and a specific exception handler, which handler will be invoked? My
expectation would be that the more specific override would win, but someone else
might expect that overriding the default would win.
It should be relatively easy to provide helpers to override the handler for
multiple/all exceptions if we do end up with tests that want that functionality.
But yeah, definitely a future problem :-)
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-09 16:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-04 18:18 [PATCH] KVM: selftests: Rename vm_handle_exception in evmcs test Ricardo Koller
2021-06-04 21:26 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-06-04 23:11 ` Ricardo Koller
2021-06-06 10:10 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-07 16:07 ` Sean Christopherson
2021-06-07 16:19 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-07 16:56 ` Ricardo Koller
2021-06-07 17:18 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-08 22:11 ` Ricardo Koller
2021-06-09 16:34 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YMDtk/Xyf/7wpIxx@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=ricarkol@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox