Hi Andre,
On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 05:58:21PM +, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Commit f39d16cbabf9 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Guard kvm_vgic_map_is_active against
> !vgic_initialized") introduced a check whether the VGIC has been
> initialized before accessing the spinlock and the VGIC data structure.
>
Hi Andre,
On 17/11/2017 18:58, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Commit f39d16cbabf9 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Guard kvm_vgic_map_is_active against
> !vgic_initialized") introduced a check whether the VGIC has been
> initialized before accessing the spinlock and the VGIC data structure.
> However the
Hi Andre,
On 17/11/2017 18:58, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Commit f39d16cbabf9 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Guard kvm_vgic_map_is_active against
> !vgic_initialized") introduced a check whether the VGIC has been
> initialized before accessing the spinlock and the VGIC data structure.
> However the
Commit f39d16cbabf9 ("KVM: arm/arm64: Guard kvm_vgic_map_is_active against
!vgic_initialized") introduced a check whether the VGIC has been
initialized before accessing the spinlock and the VGIC data structure.
However the vgic_get_irq() call in the variable declaration sneaked
through the net, so