On 12/03/2018 18:00, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> Why in save_..._legacy? If it is about FSGSBASE, shouldn't it be in >> save_fsgs? (Or if not I'm missing what the comment should be about). > It could be in save_fsgs(), I guess. The main point is to make it > clear to readers of the code in save_fsgs(), the legacy helpers, etc > that there's another piece of code in KVM that makes the same set of > somewhat problematic assumptions and that will need updating for > FSGSBASE.
Okay, that's a good idea. Paolo
