On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 at 08:38, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> but you can throw away the <<<< ... ==== part completely, and apply the
> same change on top of the new implementation:
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> index edef30359c19..9f9a29be3beb 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/cpuid.c
> @@ -1177,6 +1177,7 @@ void kvm_set_cpu_caps(void)
> EMULATED_F(NO_SMM_CTL_MSR),
> /* PrefetchCtlMsr */
> F(WRMSR_XX_BASE_NS),
> + F(SRSO_USER_KERNEL_NO),
> SYNTHESIZED_F(SBPB),
> SYNTHESIZED_F(IBPB_BRTYPE),
> SYNTHESIZED_F(SRSO_NO),
Ehh. My resolution ended up being different.
I did this instead:
F(WRMSR_XX_BASE_NS),
SYNTHESIZED_F(SBPB),
SYNTHESIZED_F(IBPB_BRTYPE),
SYNTHESIZED_F(SRSO_NO),
+ SYNTHESIZED_F(SRSO_USER_KERNEL_NO),
which (apart from the line ordering) differs from your suggestion in
F() vs SYNTHESIZED_F().
That really seemed to be the RightThing(tm) to do from the context of
the two conflicting commits, but maybe there was some reason that I
didn't catch that you kept it as a plain "F()".
So please take a look, and if I screwed up send me a fix (with a
scathing explanation for why I'm maternally related to some
less-than-gifted rodentia with syphilis).
Linus
