On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 10:50:20AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > Yeah, the funky flow I concocted was done purely to have the "no emulation" path > fall through to the common "*mem = val". I don't have a strong preference, I > mentally flipped a coin on doing that versus what you suggested, and apparently > chose poorly :-) Oh, I could definitely tell this was intentional :) But really if folks are going to add more flavors of emulated instructions to the x86 implementation (which they should) then it might make sense to just have an x86-specific function. But again, it's selftests, who cares! /s -- Thanks, Oliver
