Re: [GIT PULL] KVM/riscv changes for 6.9

From: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc: Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	 Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>,
	 Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
	Atish Patra <atishp@rivosinc.com>,
	 KVM General <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	 "open list:KERNEL VIRTUAL MACHINE FOR RISC-V (KVM/riscv)"
	<kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-riscv <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] KVM/riscv changes for 6.9
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2024 08:53:05 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240308-5d406beb72ee7f30f894c45d@orel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Zen8qGzVpaOB_vKa@google.com>

On Thu, Mar 07, 2024 at 09:43:04AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
...
> But the prototype of guest_get_vcpuid() is in common code.  Which isn't a huge
> deal, but it's rather undesirable because there's no indication that its
> implementation is arch-specific, and trying to use it in code built for s390 or
> x86 (or MIPS or PPC, which are on the horizon), would fail.  I'm all for making
> code common where possible, but going halfway and leaving a trap for other
> architectures makes for a poor experience for developers.
>

I've got a few other riscv kvm selftests cleanup patches locally queued.
I'll add another one which moves the prototype to include/riscv/processor.h
and include/aarch64/processor.h. Making guest_get_vcpuid() common (for
which I think I'm to blame) was premature and, as you point out, it should
have at least been named arch_guest_get_vcpuid(). I could do the rename
instead, but since I'm not sure if it'll ever get adopted outside riscv
and aarch64, I'll just move for now.

Thanks,
drew

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv