Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-67640-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 20:13:00 +0000
From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
	Pasha Tatashin <tatashin@google.com>,
	Michael Krebs <mkrebs@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: selftests: Test forced instruction emulation in
 dirty log test (x86 only)
Message-ID: <Zc5wTHuphbg3peZ9@linux.dev>
References: <20240215010004.1456078-1-seanjc@google.com>
 <20240215010004.1456078-3-seanjc@google.com>
 <Zc3JcNVhghB0Chlz@linux.dev>
 <Zc5c7Af-N71_RYq0@google.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Zc5c7Af-N71_RYq0@google.com>

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