From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FAD5CA9EAF for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:09:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3EAF20659 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:09:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728764AbfJUNJh (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Oct 2019 09:09:37 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51044 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728081AbfJUNJf (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Oct 2019 09:09:35 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B145C057E9F for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:09:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id 92so1927403wro.14 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 06:09:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:openpgp:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=I5TfDqwP3GoBFi7aXPlCU/8+7pDpDx0r2JS4CfEtHxg=; b=XVRo95JLfRoVbwdjHNUBNPsLaYSoGBm7jEaLWGUymTBDnsQL3lmEdaXANlTrRWMcpD OJTEc+kHGQ7UPZtnDTMjUjVBpj/5gp1eQByVsAOxMr9S1qkYHO58d8oWT6yua7mXw4kH MQuQLyUKEujTi3VXqZBfs7rcXz3MvrLCglWkPxjdOeRlX3S79hStWl9VEL6qlx4EPUoP iHTwevDU/nOm54AaDI5b5lBtAaQJgzpgWzXNfqCdnYu8AL3iS/k/0bYq7RITvhiJHr++ e82rRIEr4BywSldSdxX+BTjKLbjP/xVNGWxb23/IDulc7hLAkpv/q7jFtSMdAhCJd7ck i0NA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVOafv0pXxlXHw0ipL6WNYavll6LXNUOvsjrU0KsYyCJxL608ft rP2tX9eb8oE+utKlV6IXdgJ3Fqf1ySbrxDY9n91nC6L1b+614AIZD4SB0Ia1cjZnGWoz/qHI9gd oPoNwkFpUZUqZ X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c4d3:: with SMTP id g19mr6879885wmk.24.1571663373341; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 06:09:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwdfuBdeAwNUF9K0Edxm6DaLP4wj3yivSMIHRIOq6f468UL6EjyTuW5I6laVCpJfdImZK6ycw== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c4d3:: with SMTP id g19mr6879867wmk.24.1571663373087; Mon, 21 Oct 2019 06:09:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.10.150] ([93.56.166.5]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g5sm12740898wmg.12.2019.10.21.06.09.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 21 Oct 2019 06:09:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Make fpu allocation a common function To: Sean Christopherson Cc: Xiaoyao Li , Vitaly Kuznetsov , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Jim Mattson References: <20191014162247.61461-1-xiaoyao.li@intel.com> <87y2xn462e.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> <6cc430c1-5729-c2d3-df11-3bf1ec1272f8@intel.com> <245dcfe2-d167-fdec-a371-506352d3c684@redhat.com> <11318bab-a377-bb8c-b881-76331c92f11e@intel.com> <10300339-e4cb-57b0-ac2f-474604551df0@redhat.com> <20191017160508.GA20903@linux.intel.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 15:09:35 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191017160508.GA20903@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On 17/10/19 18:05, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:41:05AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 16/10/19 09:48, Xiaoyao Li wrote: >>> BTW, could you have a look at the series I sent yesterday to refactor >>> the vcpu creation flow, which is inspired partly by this issue. Any >>> comment and suggestion is welcomed since I don't want to waste time on >>> wrong direction. >> >> Yes, that's the series from which I'll take your patch. > > Can you hold off on taking that patch? I'm pretty sure we can do more > cleanup in that area, with less code. > Should I hold off on the whole "Refactor vcpu creation flow of x86 arch" series then? Paolo