On Thu, Jul 29, 2021, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 06:15:27PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021, Ricardo Koller wrote:
> > > + struct ucall uc;
> > > +
> > > + if (get_ucall(vm, vcpuid, &uc) == UCALL_UNHANDLED) {
> >
> > UCALL_UNHANDLED is a bit of an odd name. Without the surrounding context, I would
> > have no idea that it's referring to an unhandled event, e.g. my gut reaction would
> > be that it means the ucall itself was unhandled. Maybe UCALL_UNHANDLED_EVENT?
>
> I see. I can send a new patch (this was commited as 75275d7fbe) with a
> new name.
Eh, no need to post another patch. If it can be fixed up in tree, great, if not,
no big deal.
> The only name I can think of that's more descriptive would be
> UCALL_UNHANDLED_EXCEPTION, but that's even longer.
Unfortunately, EXCEPTION is incorrect as x86 will route unexpected IRQs through
this as well.
