On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:31:38AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 12:16:10PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 07:52:16PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 10:42:17AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > > > Doesn't bother me, I could do it in a patch ontop. But your call.
> > > >
> > > > No objection here.
> > >
> > > Something like this:
> > >
> > > ---
> > > From: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > ... so that "offsetting" is spelled the same as the respective VMX feature
> > > bit VMX_FEATURE_TSC_OFFSETTING.
> > >
> > > No functional changes.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> >
> > Reviewed-and-tested-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Yah, so I tried to do a test-merge with linux-next to see what surprises should
> I be prepared for and there's the first one:
>
> 5e3d394fdd9e ("KVM: VMX: Fix the spelling of CPU_BASED_USE_TSC_OFFSETTING")
>
> which is already in Paolo's tree. Dropping it on my side.
Doh, now that you point it out, I remember that patch going by. Sorry I
didn't recall it earlier.
Thanks for your help!
