Jan Beulich writes ("[PATCH] x86/HVM: correct cleanup after failed
viridian_vcpu_init()"):
> This happens after nestedhvm_vcpu_initialise(), so its effects also need
> to be undone.
>
> Fixes: 40a4a9d72d16 ("viridian: add init hooks")
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>
>
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> @@ -1583,7 +1583,7 @@ int hvm_vcpu_initialise(struct vcpu *v)
>
> rc = viridian_vcpu_init(v);
> if ( rc )
> - goto fail5;
> + goto fail6;
Not acomment about the patch; rather about the code in general.
I have not looked at the context.
But OMG, this is horrific. How can anyone write code in such an idiom
without writing endless bugs ?
Ian.
