Le 07/04/2021 à 19:05, Sean Christopherson a écrit :
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021, Borislav Petkov wrote:
First of all, I'd strongly suggest you trim your emails when you reply -
that would be much appreciated.
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 07:24:54AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
@@ -258,7 +240,7 @@ static int sev_issue_cmd(struct kvm *kvm, int id, void
*data, int *error)
static int sev_launch_start(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_sev_cmd *argp)
{
struct kvm_sev_info *sev = &to_kvm_svm(kvm)->sev_info;
- struct sev_data_launch_start *start;
+ struct sev_data_launch_start start;
struct sev_data_launch_start start = {0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0};
I don't know how this is any better than using memset...
Also, you can do
... start = { };
which is certainly the only other alternative to memset, AFAIK.
But whatever you do, you need to look at the resulting asm the compiler
generates. So let's do that:
I'm ok with Boris' version, I'm not a fan of having to count zeros. I used
memset() to defer initialization until after the various sanity checks, and
out of habit.
Yes I also like Boris' version ... start = { }; better than mine.
