Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] KVM: s390: clean up redundant 'kvm_run' parameters | From | Tianjia Zhang <> | Date | Thu, 23 Apr 2020 11:14:49 +0800 |
| |
On 2020/4/22 23:58, Christian Borntraeger wrote: > > > On 22.04.20 15:45, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 20:58:04 +0800 >> Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: >> >>> In the current kvm version, 'kvm_run' has been included in the 'kvm_vcpu' >>> structure. Earlier than historical reasons, many kvm-related function >> >> s/Earlier than/For/ ? >> >>> parameters retain the 'kvm_run' and 'kvm_vcpu' parameters at the same time. >>> This patch does a unified cleanup of these remaining redundant parameters. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> >>> --- >>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- >>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >>> index e335a7e5ead7..d7bb2e7a07ff 100644 >>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c >>> @@ -4176,8 +4176,9 @@ static int __vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) >>> return rc; >>> } >>> >>> -static void sync_regs_fmt2(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *kvm_run) >>> +static void sync_regs_fmt2(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) >>> { >>> + struct kvm_run *kvm_run = vcpu->run; >>> struct runtime_instr_cb *riccb; >>> struct gs_cb *gscb; >>> >>> @@ -4235,7 +4236,7 @@ static void sync_regs_fmt2(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *kvm_run) >>> } >>> if (vcpu->arch.gs_enabled) { >>> current->thread.gs_cb = (struct gs_cb *) >>> - &vcpu->run->s.regs.gscb; >>> + &kvm_run->s.regs.gscb; >> >> Not sure if these changes (vcpu->run-> => kvm_run->) are really worth >> it. (It seems they amount to at least as much as the changes advertised >> in the patch description.) >> >> Other opinions? > > Agreed. It feels kind of random. Maybe just do the first line (move kvm_run from the > function parameter list into the variable declaration)? Not sure if this is better. >
Why not, `kvm_run` is equivalent to `vcpu->run`, which is also part of the cleanup, or do you mean to put this change in another patch?
Thanks, Tianjia
| |