Re: [PATCH] gvisor: add some missing definitions to vmx.h

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

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