Re: [PATCH v4 01/11] viridian: don't blindly write to 32-bit registers is 'mode' is invalid

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 02.12.2020 10:21, Paul Durrant wrote:
> From: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> If hvm_guest_x86_mode() returns something other than 8 or 4 then
> viridian_hypercall() will return immediately but, on the way out, will write
> back status as if 'mode' was 4. This patch simply makes it leave the registers
> alone.
> 
> NOTE: The formatting of the 'out' label and the switch statement are also
>       adjusted as per CODING_STYLE.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Cc: Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> v4:
>  - Fixed another CODING_STYLE violation.

Partly:

> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/viridian/viridian.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/viridian/viridian.c
> @@ -692,13 +692,15 @@ int viridian_hypercall(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
>          break;
>      }
>  
> -out:
> + out:
>      output.result = status;
> -    switch (mode) {
> +    switch (mode)

There are also two blanks missing here. Will again record this as
to be taken care of while committing, once an ack arrives. (And
btw, the earlier of the two "is" in the subject also wants to be
"if".)

Jan