On 13.01.2022 17:38, Andrew Cooper wrote: > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/svm/entry.S > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/svm/entry.S > @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ __UNLIKELY_END(nsvm_hap) > mov VCPUMSR_spec_ctrl_raw(%rax), %eax > > /* WARNING! `ret`, `call *`, `jmp *` not safe beyond this point. */ > - SPEC_CTRL_EXIT_TO_HVM /* Req: a=spec_ctrl %rsp=regs/cpuinfo, Clob: > cd */ > + /* SPEC_CTRL_EXIT_TO_SVM (nothing currently) */ > > pop %r15 > pop %r14 > @@ -86,7 +86,8 @@ __UNLIKELY_END(nsvm_hap) > > GET_CURRENT(bx) > > - SPEC_CTRL_ENTRY_FROM_HVM /* Req: b=curr %rsp=regs/cpuinfo, Clob: > acd */ > + /* SPEC_CTRL_ENTRY_FROM_SVM Req: b=curr %rsp=regs/cpuinfo, Clob: > ac */ > + ALTERNATIVE "", DO_OVERWRITE_RSB, X86_FEATURE_SC_RSB_HVM
Just for my own understanding: The comments you add aren't commented out macro invocations (as I did read it first), but comments naming would-be-macros which are then expanded "manually"? That is partly because initially I read the description saying "Expand and drop the macros" as meaning that the macros grow in what they contain, which looked contradictory to them getting dropped at the same time. Perhaps me not sufficiently understanding the difference between all possible meanings of "expand" vs "extend" ... Jan
