On 22/02/2023 12:59 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 22.02.2023 13:00, Xenia Ragiadakou wrote:
>> Remove forward declaration of struct vcpu, that is a leftover since
>> the removal of svm_update_guest_cr()'s declaration from svm.h.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalod...@gmail.com>
> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
>
>> Fixes: b158e72abe30 ("x86/hvm: CFI hardening for hvm_funcs")
> I'm a little puzzled by this (a stray forward decl of a struct isn't
> really a bug imo), but ...
>> ---
>>
>> Changes in v2:
>> - leave the forward declaration of struct cpu_user_regs in place,
>> suggested by Andrew
>> - add a fixes tag based on Andrew's comment
> ... I realize you were asked to add it. (As a minor remark, more
> commonly the Fixes: tag would come ahead of the S-o-b: one, I think.)
I didn't intend my reply to mean "put in a fixes tag". I was just
trying to make an observation. But it doesn't hurt either.
But I do agree that a Fixes tag ought to be ahead of a SoB tag. Where
possible, we put tags in chronological order.
I can fix that on commit.
~Andrew
