Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 24 Jan 2022 10:43:50 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] gvisor: add some missing definitions to vmx.h | From | Paolo Bonzini <> |
| |
On 1/23/22 20:53, Ayush Ranjan wrote: > From: Michael Davidson <md@google.com> > > gvisor needs definitions for some additional secondary exec controls. > > Tested: builds > Signed-off-by: Ayush Ranjan <ayushranjan@google.com> > Signed-off-by: Michael Davidson <md@google.com>
Incorrect order of the Signed-off-by header (author goes first, submitter goes last).
> --- > arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h > index c77ad687cdf7..df40dc568eb9 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h > @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ > #define SECONDARY_EXEC_ENCLS_EXITING VMCS_CONTROL_BIT(ENCLS_EXITING) > #define SECONDARY_EXEC_RDSEED_EXITING VMCS_CONTROL_BIT(RDSEED_EXITING) > #define SECONDARY_EXEC_ENABLE_PML VMCS_CONTROL_BIT(PAGE_MOD_LOGGING) > +#define SECONDARY_EXEC_EPT_VE VMCS_CONTROL_BIT(EPT_VIOLATION_VE) > #define SECONDARY_EXEC_PT_CONCEAL_VMX VMCS_CONTROL_BIT(PT_CONCEAL_VMX) > #define SECONDARY_EXEC_XSAVES VMCS_CONTROL_BIT(XSAVES) > #define SECONDARY_EXEC_MODE_BASED_EPT_EXEC VMCS_CONTROL_BIT(MODE_BASED_EPT_EXEC)
I'm not sure why gvisor would care about an internal Linux header. gvisor should only use arch/x86/include/uapi headers.
Paolo
| |