On 02/11/2023 8:57 am, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 01.11.2023 20:20, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c >> @@ -4097,10 +4097,6 @@ void vmx_vmexit_handler(struct cpu_user_regs *regs) >> case EXIT_REASON_MCE_DURING_VMENTRY: >> do_machine_check(regs); >> break; >> - >> - case EXIT_REASON_INIT: >> - printk(XENLOG_ERR "Error: INIT received - ignoring\n"); >> - return; /* Renter the guest without further processing */ >> } > Wouldn't the printk() better remain where it was, and just the "return" be > purged?
Not really... that would hit the unknown vmexit path in the second. We actually have a variety of empty cases in the second. We could add another. ~Andrew
