Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 16 Nov 2021 18:57:49 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Use a stable condition around all VT-d PI paths | From | Paolo Bonzini <> |
| |
On 11/16/21 18:42, Sean Christopherson wrote: >> + return kvm_arch_has_assigned_device(kvm) && >> + irq_remapping_cap(IRQ_POSTING_CAP) && >> + irqchip_in_kernel(kvm) && enable_apicv; > Bad indentation/alignment.
What is even the right indentation? I'd just wrap everything in parentheses but then check patch complains "return is not a function" (NSS), so I went for two tabs and called it a day.
> Not that it's likely to matter, but would it make sense to invert the checks so > that they're short-circuited on the faster KVM checks? E.g. fastest to slowest: > > return irqchip_in_kernel(kvm) && enable_apic && > kvm_arch_has_assigned_device(kvm) && > irq_remapping_cap(IRQ_POSTING_CAP);
Sure, why not.
Paolo
| |