Received: by 2002:a05:6358:11c7:b0:104:8066:f915 with SMTP id i7csp6648640rwl; Tue, 4 Apr 2023 16:45:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350ZbwrjRvJF/Wb3vyyB6SjLuoz/ggHMXD+9uHp7JeUGTsq5CGuFN93XK6ph3FeJC9Ea/Sxx7 X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:368d:b0:931:636e:de5a with SMTP id a13-20020a170906368d00b00931636ede5amr1136785ejc.31.1680651933951; Tue, 04 Apr 2023 16:45:33 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1680651933; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=gsp+vDuoFxFR+A3Uvs9r2aEYX0g0oisge/W+gXEf2LkLq3f8h8PKV1kR/bl62zIG7a +m1cqGvOlO+G5Zd/pQDjF3gr63gAJagP0zSQcLaEeACcFLV0nd72moVptQbUYfOJHROo DPGd6wqVBZG9dm93qbI+TJHQikC5O+29TcPKI1qwziev0VqxKOIaSpEjdrwyx18lKh1/ KT7JO/hAQqquPKlcHZfLBcIyuqX2DsSudSX5nghj5buJFGTxsMLe+F1jcOXxxzIpFKID Z5Ap4Ek23/N2TCKJJcFWQI6DTcjeo4m0Ijjdixc6Q3WVvrkjrbFotOqIn577a76DqJ5t N+VQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-to:date:dkim-signature; bh=1RtBEBKe4cc1n2k+4f6iP8Gi/6GJTf7g8CUK0JvY99E=; b=q/Eyi5CephxAOrvWSORbU/El5Sx32TAXNBWl2Qp2GraW4mCUTjgsk9YaQrMkKBKLnO 7/C2AVdFDKqAvgNhG5sOz24k1//secpu4Gre15v8bOSvnWYHb98eHlxkwMoudbV5AcXc KL9pZ1RWQxMENEGgTFzPx2lxytVA9Fjw2P+EFgbZA29tUJZv5DtiufaPLm02ZlJSDi2x RR/uKNkXHWwrfzwmQdytzgPe0vJ+6I/1cxkQNTD1QgCmgMUxmHZ9SEACWvh4b+IkdTVs B1a0qMHzdmjdX+N8jJ98hKiy8A016Ul/C6BFZZfAj/uZPH1uTQqySRlc5Ibo/tN/0mBv cNoA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=ZVQOi8EM; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id t8-20020a170906178800b0092aec83107esi1900077eje.660.2023.04.04.16.45.00; Tue, 04 Apr 2023 16:45:33 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=ZVQOi8EM; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236489AbjDDXo2 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 4 Apr 2023 19:44:28 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56158 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230465AbjDDXo1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Apr 2023 19:44:27 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x54a.google.com (mail-pg1-x54a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::54a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42E513C1D for ; Tue, 4 Apr 2023 16:44:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x54a.google.com with SMTP id t12-20020a65608c000000b005091ec4f2d4so10196549pgu.20 for ; Tue, 04 Apr 2023 16:44:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; t=1680651866; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=1RtBEBKe4cc1n2k+4f6iP8Gi/6GJTf7g8CUK0JvY99E=; b=ZVQOi8EMQ70xTg1fO5Td6o4KuLOz2xcmCaCBLRplPUFXNQcLP+4v4x5+MZoTxOgECI DspOjAWW4WGncjvAcfhYdgUaXrpfvpyG8DBe6SmYLmHmq6HNZdWn6f178c/ZwaNnKxKr ey0Ve46m8oIPfSKz22s05A5ZMrGZqWy77uJ58Ls6hxuRgs57gA/a2W1PsojQiBpA8vyE pYqWkWuKoRIUEUnCnPRR9BT+KPw2meoe1SfjvIxQhmmCVSUvQQD/X1WY8LfiNuRCAvhG f26O+SpdUatdKiyYTK8roZt9Ydk722PPiqV5prwO73gL0cbfnY1UcxOdNDVnpirjAjbO +RUQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1680651866; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=1RtBEBKe4cc1n2k+4f6iP8Gi/6GJTf7g8CUK0JvY99E=; b=bQbMv4nuIHte/EbfYTjWIMWeAqS5/KJQW8g/9HL7owuvGJIV3vHeQ2gnHtDy75gEtQ Q7kTNlKPHbJxEPTooyHlaVRrJ5vs8koVbyf14k9xSRwJscYHWJOvqQ2U+U9fbi54E4CO ck+VLwF6gwZqwaJWN+xM1KkvAZVnLNEyJ3b8sc9L36ANjmAnI1IZCzeEzof8ecWy/InZ bT9URIBaTNOjQdkzjOFlE08LPPTvaDhkr9taFSq8CUpN+FNzWt3VH6tkQv/0gQ0m9/lx R5ueSbSt5z1vPeJrFk9h9JolFfPm6P0t7KLaN/WRkXz8AnsIaF8ZPKJXL5uTbnITtpAe SKdA== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9dJQvONqUuvpxu8w9rWE8eb2w5uQ7UNf0sArJIGe3Pft2mVVNng y7AVyKOThZvE78i3gNHhkOSEn1AWv08= X-Received: from zagreus.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:7f:e700:c0a8:5c37]) (user=seanjc job=sendgmr) by 2002:a17:90a:a88:b0:237:1fe0:b151 with SMTP id 8-20020a17090a0a8800b002371fe0b151mr1558403pjw.8.1680651865788; Tue, 04 Apr 2023 16:44:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2023 16:43:40 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20230403095200.1391782-1-korantwork@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20230403095200.1391782-1-korantwork@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.40.0.348.gf938b09366-goog Message-ID: <168063175075.174995.217166777153935864.b4-ty@google.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH REBASED] KVM: x86: SVM: Fix one redefine issue about VMCB_AVIC_APIC_BAR_MASK From: Sean Christopherson To: Sean Christopherson , pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, mlevitsk@redhat.com, korantwork@gmail.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Xinghui Li Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.7 required=5.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 03 Apr 2023 17:52:00 +0800, korantwork@gmail.com wrote: > VMCB_AVIC_APIC_BAR_MASK is defined twice with the same value in svm.h, > which is meaningless. Delete the duplicate one. Applied to kvm-x86 svm, thanks! In the future, please don't use "PATCH REBASED". If you're sending a new version of a patch that's been rebased, then the revision number needs to be bumped. The fact that the only change is that the patch was rebased isn't relevant as far as versioning is concerned, it's still a new version. The cover letter and/or ignored part of the patch is where the delta between versions should be captured. And in this case, there really was no need to send a new version, the original patch still applies cleanly. I suspect that the REBASED version was sent as a form of a ping, which again is not the right way to ping a patch/series. If you want to ping, please reply to the original patch. Unnecessarily sending new versions means more patches to sort through, i.e. makes maintainers lives harder, not easier. [1/1] KVM: x86: SVM: Fix one redefine issue about VMCB_AVIC_APIC_BAR_MASK https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/commit/c0d0ce9b5a85 -- https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/tree/next https://github.com/kvm-x86/linux/tree/fixes