Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] KVM: VMX: Introduce unified instruction info structure

[Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>]

On Fri, Mar 06, 2026, Chang S. Bae wrote:
> On 3/4/2026 8:21 PM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > static inline int vmx_get_insn_info_reg(u64 insn_info)
> > {
> > 	return vmx_insn_info_extended() ? (insn_info >> ??) & 0x1f :
> > 					  (insn_info >> 3) & 0xf;
> > }
> 
> There is
> 
> int get_vmx_mem_address(...)
> {
> 	...
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * According to Vol. 3B,...
> 	 */
> 	int  scaling = vmx_instruction_info & 3;
> 	int  addr_size = (vmx_instruction_info >> 7) & 7;
> 	bool is_reg = vmx_instruction_info & (1u << 10);
> 	int  seg_reg = (vmx_instruction_info >> 15) & 7;
> 	int  index_reg = (vmx_instruction_info >> 18) & 0xf;
> 	bool index_is_valid = !(vmx_instruction_info & (1u << 22));
> 	int  base_reg       = (vmx_instruction_info >> 23) & 0xf;
> 	bool base_is_valid  = !(vmx_instruction_info & (1u << 27));
> 
> I'd assume wrappers like above for each line there.

Ya.

> But to confirm your preference: would you rather keep this open-coded, or
> introduce another wrappers for each?

Assuming the alternative is to open code both the extended and regular versions,
yes, definitely add wrappers.