On 05.03.2025 15:47, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 25/02/2025 11:37 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> __init{const,data}_cf_clobber can have an effect only for pointers
>> actually populated in the respective tables. While not the case for SVM
>> right now, VMX installs a number of pointers only under certain
>> conditions. Hence the respective functions would have their ENDBR purged
>> only when those conditions are met. Invoke "pruning" functions after
>> having copied the respective tables, for them to install any "missing"
>> pointers.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
>
> I don't especially like this, but I can't suggest anything better right
> now, so
>
> Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>
Thanks.
>> Originally I had meant to put the SVM and VMX functions in presmp-
>> initcalls, but hvm/{svm,vmx}/built_in.o are linked into hvm/built_in.o
>> before hvm/hvm.o. And I don't think I want to fiddle with link order
>> here.
>
> Why does the link order matter?
Because hvm_enable() is a pre-SMP initcall, and if the new vendor functions
also were such, they'd need to run later.
Jan
