Re: [RFC] Have insn decoder functions return success/failure

[Borislav Petkov]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 09:50:13AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Agreed. So I'm OK for returning the result of "decoding".
> But we also need to note that the returning success doesn't
> mean the instruction is valid. That needs another validator.
>
...

>
> Yes, so let's add the return value (with a note, so that someone
> does not try to use it for validation).

Ok, I'm unclear on that "validation" you talk about. What exactly do
you mean? Can you give an example of how one would determine whether an
instruction is valid? And valid how?

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette