From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on archive.lwn.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by archive.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D2DD7D2F0 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 13:51:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388337AbfHGNvS (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Aug 2019 09:51:18 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:48890 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388123AbfHGNvS (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Aug 2019 09:51:18 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D9F228; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 06:51:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.197.61] (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D77E03F706; Wed, 7 Aug 2019 06:51:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] KVM: arm64: Provide a PV_TIME device to user space To: Steven Price Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Catalin Marinas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , Paolo Bonzini , Will Deacon , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <20190802145017.42543-1-steven.price@arm.com> <20190802145017.42543-7-steven.price@arm.com> <20190803135113.6cdf500c@why> <20190803183335.149e0113@why> <5aa54066-b9f6-22d1-fa2b-ce5cbf244ab5@arm.com> From: Marc Zyngier Organization: Approximate Message-ID: <9c416f28-d078-4575-8095-8b4cccfe40ec@kernel.org> Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2019 14:51:15 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5aa54066-b9f6-22d1-fa2b-ce5cbf244ab5@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org On 07/08/2019 14:39, Steven Price wrote: > On 03/08/2019 18:34, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> On Sat, 3 Aug 2019 13:51:13 +0100 >> Marc Zyngier wrote: >> >> [forgot that one] >> >>> On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 15:50:14 +0100 >>> Steven Price wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>>> +static int __init kvm_pvtime_init(void) >>>> +{ >>>> + kvm_register_device_ops(&pvtime_ops, KVM_DEV_TYPE_ARM_PV_TIME); >>>> + >>>> + return 0; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> +late_initcall(kvm_pvtime_init); >> >> Why is it an initcall? So far, the only initcall we've used is the one >> that initializes KVM itself. Can't we just the device_ops just like we >> do for the vgic? > > So would you prefer a direct call from init_subsystems() in > virt/kvm/arm/arm.c? Yes. Consistency is important. > The benefit of initcall is just that it keeps the code self-contained. > In init_subsystems() I'd either need a #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64 or a dummy > function for arm. Having a dummy function for 32bit ARM is fine. Most of the code we add to the 32bit port is made of empty stubs anyway. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead, it just smells funny...