>>> -
>>> if (vmx->nested.vmxon) {
>>> nested_vmx_failValid(vcpu, VMXERR_VMXON_IN_VMX_ROOT_OPERATION);
>>> return kvm_skip_emulated_instruction(vcpu);
>>> @@ -7161,30 +7151,18 @@ static int handle_vmon(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> * Intel's VMX Instruction Reference specifies a common set of prerequisites
>>> * for running VMX instructions (except VMXON, whose prerequisites are
>>> * slightly different). It also specifies what exception to inject otherwise.
>>> + * Note that many of these exceptions have priority over VM exits, so they
>>> + * don't have to be checked again here.
>>> */
>>> -static int nested_vmx_check_permission(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> +static bool nested_vmx_check_permission(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>
>> I'm a fan of splitting such changes out. (less noise for reviewing the
>> actual magic).
>
> Do you mean you'd like to see separate patches for handle_vmon() and
> nested_vmx_check_permission()?
I was talking of the int->bool. But that is just my preference for
reviewing. And by far not worth a resend :)
>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> David
--
Thanks,
David
