kvmarm.lists.cs.columbia.edu archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	James Hogan <jhogan@kernel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Directly return result from kvm_arch_check_processor_compat()
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:57:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190423105725.73f5680e.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190420051817.5644-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>

On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 22:18:17 -0700
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> wrote:

> Add a wrapper to invoke kvm_arch_check_processor_compat() so that the
> boilerplate ugliness of checking virtualization support on all CPUs is
> hidden from the arch specific code.  x86's implementation in particular
> is quite heinous, as it unnecessarily propagates the out-param pattern
> into kvm_x86_ops.
> 
> While the x86 specific issue could be resolved solely by changing
> kvm_x86_ops, make the change for all architectures as returning a value
> directly is prettier and technically more robust, e.g. s390 doesn't set
> the out param, which could lead to subtle breakage in the (highly
> unlikely) scenario where the out-param was not pre-initialized by the
> caller.
> 
> Opportunistically annotate svm_check_processor_compat() with __init.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
> ---
> 
> Tested on VMX only.
> 
>  arch/mips/kvm/mips.c             | 4 ++--
>  arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c       | 4 ++--
>  arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 -
>  arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 5 +++++
>  arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h  | 2 +-
>  arch/x86/kvm/svm.c               | 4 ++--
>  arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c           | 8 ++++----
>  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c               | 4 ++--
>  include/linux/kvm_host.h         | 2 +-
>  virt/kvm/arm/arm.c               | 4 ++--
>  virt/kvm/kvm_main.c              | 9 ++++++---
>  11 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

Yes, this does look nicer.

Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
	James Hogan <jhogan@kernel.org>, Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: Directly return result from kvm_arch_check_processor_compat()
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2019 10:57:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190423105725.73f5680e.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190423085725.D0AEUAgZxcp9MulCn9CYQcpOklqKAZxfKA_eKQcXbqw@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190420051817.5644-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>

On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 22:18:17 -0700
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> wrote:

> Add a wrapper to invoke kvm_arch_check_processor_compat() so that the
> boilerplate ugliness of checking virtualization support on all CPUs is
> hidden from the arch specific code.  x86's implementation in particular
> is quite heinous, as it unnecessarily propagates the out-param pattern
> into kvm_x86_ops.
> 
> While the x86 specific issue could be resolved solely by changing
> kvm_x86_ops, make the change for all architectures as returning a value
> directly is prettier and technically more robust, e.g. s390 doesn't set
> the out param, which could lead to subtle breakage in the (highly
> unlikely) scenario where the out-param was not pre-initialized by the
> caller.
> 
> Opportunistically annotate svm_check_processor_compat() with __init.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
> ---
> 
> Tested on VMX only.
> 
>  arch/mips/kvm/mips.c             | 4 ++--
>  arch/powerpc/kvm/powerpc.c       | 4 ++--
>  arch/s390/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 -
>  arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c         | 5 +++++
>  arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h  | 2 +-
>  arch/x86/kvm/svm.c               | 4 ++--
>  arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c           | 8 ++++----
>  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c               | 4 ++--
>  include/linux/kvm_host.h         | 2 +-
>  virt/kvm/arm/arm.c               | 4 ++--
>  virt/kvm/kvm_main.c              | 9 ++++++---
>  11 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

Yes, this does look nicer.

Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-04-23  8:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-20  5:18 [PATCH] KVM: Directly return result from kvm_arch_check_processor_compat() Sean Christopherson
2019-04-20  5:18 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-04-23  8:57 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2019-04-23  8:57   ` Cornelia Huck
2019-04-23 10:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2019-04-23 10:14   ` Marc Zyngier
2019-05-20 13:43 ` Paolo Bonzini

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20190423105725.73f5680e.cohuck@redhat.com \
    --to=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jhogan@kernel.org \
    --cc=joro@8bytes.org \
    --cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=paulus@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).