Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] x86/svm: remove unused forward declaration of struct vcpu from svm.h

[Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalodowa@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 2/23/23 12:50, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> 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 <burzalodowa@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> >
> > > 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.
Thanks. I ve added it just for reference. It s ok to remove it.

> ~Andrew
--
Xenia