Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Fri, 18 Feb 2022 18:20:17 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] KVM: x86: allow defining return-0 static calls | From | Paolo Bonzini <> |
| |
On 2/18/22 17:29, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> A few vendor callbacks are only used by VMX, but they return an integer >> or bool value. Introduce KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0 for them: if a func is >> NULL in struct kvm_x86_ops, it will be changed to __static_call_return0 >> when updating static calls. >> >> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> >> --- >> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h | 15 +++++++++------ >> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 4 ++++ >> arch/x86/kvm/svm/avic.c | 5 ----- >> arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c | 20 -------------------- >> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 2 +- >> kernel/static_call.c | 1 + >> 6 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h >> index c0ec066a8599..29affccb353c 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h >> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h >> @@ -10,7 +10,9 @@ BUILD_BUG_ON(1) >> * >> * KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL() can be used for those functions that can have >> * a NULL definition, for example if "static_call_cond()" will be used >> - * at the call sites. >> + * at the call sites. KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0() can be used likewise >> + * to make a definition optional, but in this case the default will >> + * be __static_call_return0. > > __static_call_return0() > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c >> index ab1c4778824a..d3da64106685 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c >> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c >> @@ -131,6 +131,7 @@ struct kvm_x86_ops kvm_x86_ops __read_mostly; >> DEFINE_STATIC_CALL_NULL(kvm_x86_##func, \ >> *(((struct kvm_x86_ops *)0)->func)); >> #define KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL KVM_X86_OP >> +#define KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0 KVM_X86_OP >> #include <asm/kvm-x86-ops.h> >> EXPORT_STATIC_CALL_GPL(kvm_x86_get_cs_db_l_bits); >> EXPORT_STATIC_CALL_GPL(kvm_x86_cache_reg); >> @@ -12016,7 +12017,6 @@ void kvm_arch_flush_shadow_memslot(struct kvm *kvm, >> static inline bool kvm_guest_apic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) >> { >> return (is_guest_mode(vcpu) && >> - kvm_x86_ops.guest_apic_has_interrupt && >> static_call(kvm_x86_guest_apic_has_interrupt)(vcpu)); > > Can you opportunistically align the indentation and drop the outer parantheses? I.e. > > return is_guest_mode(vcpu) && > static_call(kvm_x86_guest_apic_has_interrupt)(vcpu);
Hmm, I like having the parentheses (despite "return not being a function") because editors are inconsistent in what indentation to use after return.
Some use a tab (which does the right thing just by chance with Linux because "return " is as long as a tab is wide), but vim for example does the totally awkward
int f() { return a && b; }
Of course I can fix the indentation.
Paolo
>> } >> >> diff --git a/kernel/static_call.c b/kernel/static_call.c >> index 43ba0b1e0edb..76abd46fe6ee 100644 >> --- a/kernel/static_call.c >> +++ b/kernel/static_call.c >> @@ -503,6 +503,7 @@ long __static_call_return0(void) >> { >> return 0; >> } >> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__static_call_return0) > > This doesn't compile, it needs a semicolon. >
| |