On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 06:05:01PM +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: > On Thu, 30 May 2019 16:13:12 +0100 > Dave Martin <dave.mar...@arm.com> wrote: > > > To help the user understand what is going on, amend ptrauth > > configuration diagnostic messages to refer to command line options > > by the exact name used on the command line. > > > > Also, provide a clean diagnostic when ptrauth is requested, but not > > availble. The generic "Unable to initialise vcpu" message is > > rather cryptic for this case. > > Again I don't see much value in having this as a separate patch, as it > basically just touches code introduced two patches earlier. I think it > should be merged into 5/9.
Same as with the previous patch, I though it was better to keep it separate for review purposes for now, since it makes changes on top of Amit's existing patch. > > Since we now don't attempt to enable ptrauth at all unless KVM > > reports the relevant capabilities, remove the error message for > > that case too: in any case, we can't diagnose precisely why > > KVM_ARM_VCPU_INIT failed, so the message may be misleading. > > So this leaves the only point where we use .enable_ptrauth to that error > message about the host not supporting it. Not sure if that's worth this > separate option? There is indeed a question to be resolved here. See my response to the penultimate patch. Cheers ---Dave _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
