On 24.04.2024 11:16, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 04:32:14PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Drop the inner scope that was left from earlier if/else removal. Take
>> the opportunity and make the paging_unlock() invocation common to
>> success and error paths, though.
>
> TBH I'm not sure I prefer the fact to continue function execution
> after an error is found, I specially dislike that you have to add a
> !rc check to the nestedhvm conditional block, and because anything
> that we further add to the function would also need a !rc check.
>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
>
> Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com>
Thanks.
> Albeit I do prefer the extra call to paging_unlock() and early return
> from the function in case of error.
Which puts me in the middle of your preference and the one George voiced
in the context of what is now cc950c49ae6a ("x86/PoD: tie together P2M
update and increment of entry count"). Doing the extra adjustment was
merely in the hope of meeting his desires ...
Jan
