Re: [PATCH] KVM: SVM: Fix reserved fields of struct sev_es_save_area

[Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao@amd.com>]

On 10/22/22 02:46, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

> On 10/4/22 18:29, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> If we really want to the number to have any kind of meaning without 
>> needing a pile
>> of churn for every update, the best idea I can think of is to name 
>> them reserved_<offset>.
>> That way only the affected reserved field needs to be modified when 
>> adding new
>> legal fields.  But that has it's own flavor of maintenance burden as 
>> calculating
>> and verifying the offset is a waste of everyone's time.
>
> Finding the right offsets is usually pretty quick because they can be 
> found in the manual (or something close to the offset can be found 
> there) and verifying them can be done with BUILD_BUG_ON.
>
> If Carlos prepared a patch using offsets (with BUILD_BUG_ON to ensure 
> no future bitrot) I would apply it gladly.  If it's just renumbering 
> as in this one, however, I'd just ignore it.
>
> Paolo
>
> Paolo
>
Sure, I'm sending that.

Thanks,

Carlos