Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:4 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:4;
Date:   Thu, 7 Dec 2023 08:31:09 -0800
In-Reply-To: <6cd419ff-97d9-495b-bc9c-0c53c4b1e3d1@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
References: <20231206032054.55070-1-likexu@tencent.com> <ZXCTppx4II1sbRAl@google.com>
 <6cd419ff-97d9-495b-bc9c-0c53c4b1e3d1@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ZXHzTaZU1TY_HEVC@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] KVM: x86/intr: Explicitly check NMI from guest to
 eliminate false positives
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To:     Like Xu <like.xu.linux@gmail.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Dec 07, 2023, Like Xu wrote:
> On 6/12/2023 11:30 pm, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Please don't make up random prefixes.  This should really be "x86/pmu".
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> I'm hesitant to categorize about NMI handling into kvm/pmu scope.

Why?  Literally the only thing this can affect is PMU behavior.  Even if there's
a bug that affects the kernel's PMU, that's still x86/pmu as far as KVM is
concerned.