From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Suzuki K Poulose Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] arm64: KVM: PMU: Refactor pmu_*_el0_disabled Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:03:39 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20170327160345.12402-1-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <20170327160345.12402-2-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Shannon Zhao To: Marc Zyngier , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170327160345.12402-2-marc.zyngier@arm.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 27/03/17 17:03, Marc Zyngier wrote: > There is a lot of duplication in the pmu_*_el0_disabled helpers, > and as we're going to modify them shortly, let's move all the > common stuff in a single function. > > No functionnal change. nit: s/functionnal/functional > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier > --- > arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 25 +++++++++++-------------- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c > index 0e26f8c2b56f..7e1d673304d5 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c > @@ -460,35 +460,32 @@ static void reset_pmcr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct sys_reg_desc *r) > vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0) = val; > } > > -static bool pmu_access_el0_disabled(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +static bool check_disabled(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 flags) minor nit: check_disabled sounds too generic for a helper which checks for something specific to pmuserenr_el0 register in a file where we deal with lot of system registers. check_pmu_access_disabled() ? Suzuki From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com (Suzuki K Poulose) Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:03:39 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2 1/9] arm64: KVM: PMU: Refactor pmu_*_el0_disabled In-Reply-To: <20170327160345.12402-2-marc.zyngier@arm.com> References: <20170327160345.12402-1-marc.zyngier@arm.com> <20170327160345.12402-2-marc.zyngier@arm.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 27/03/17 17:03, Marc Zyngier wrote: > There is a lot of duplication in the pmu_*_el0_disabled helpers, > and as we're going to modify them shortly, let's move all the > common stuff in a single function. > > No functionnal change. nit: s/functionnal/functional > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier > --- > arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 25 +++++++++++-------------- > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c > index 0e26f8c2b56f..7e1d673304d5 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c > @@ -460,35 +460,32 @@ static void reset_pmcr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct sys_reg_desc *r) > vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0) = val; > } > > -static bool pmu_access_el0_disabled(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > +static bool check_disabled(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 flags) minor nit: check_disabled sounds too generic for a helper which checks for something specific to pmuserenr_el0 register in a file where we deal with lot of system registers. check_pmu_access_disabled() ? Suzuki