On 30/09/21 17:11, Sean Christopherson wrote:
But, perhaps adding kvm_find_cpuid_entry_index and removing the last
parameter from kvm_find_cpuid_entry would be a good idea.
I like this idea, but only if callers are forced to specify the index when the
index is significant, e.g. add a magic CPUID_INDEX_DONT_CARE and WARN in
cpuid_entry2_find() if index is significant and index == DONT_CARE.
Yeah, or it can just be that kvm_find_cpuid_entry passes -1 which acts
as the magic value.
I'll fiddle with this, unless you want the honors?
Not really. :) Thanks,
Paolo
