Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] KVM: x86: CPUID emulation and tracing fixes
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Pu Wen <puwen@hygon.cn>
References: <20200305013437.8578-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
 <6071310f-dd4b-6a6d-5578-7b6f72a9b1be@redhat.com>
 <20200305171204.GI11500@linux.intel.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <7d17c0c1-cdf0-f8cc-0cc4-4b9dda0b514d@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 6 Mar 2020 09:45:26 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.4.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200305171204.GI11500@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 05/03/20 18:12, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>>> In theory, everything up to the refactoring is non-controversial, i.e. we
>>> can bikeshed the refactoring without delaying the bug fixes.
>> Even the refactoring itself is much less controversial.  I queued
>> everything, there's always time to unqueue.
> Looks like the build-time assertions don't play nice with older versions of
> gcc :-(

Yes, I was quite surprised that they worked.  I suppose you could write
a macro that checks against 'G', 'e', 'n', 'u', 'i', 'n', 'e', 'I', 'n',
't', 'e', 'l'...

Paolo