On 03/12/15 11:08, Pavel Fedin wrote: > Hello! > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c >>> b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c index 87a64e8..a667228 100644 --- >>> a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c @@ >>> -102,7 +102,7 @@ static bool access_vm_reg(struct kvm_vcpu >>> *vcpu, >>> >>> BUG_ON(!p->is_write); >>> >>> - val = *vcpu_reg(vcpu, p->Rt); + val = *p->val; >> >> Why does it have to be a pointer? You could just have "val = >> p->val" if you carried the actual value instead of a pointer to the >> stack variable holding that value. > > There's only one concern for pointer approach. Actually, this > refactor is based on my vGICv3 live migration API patch set: > http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg124205.html > http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg124202.html > > It's simply more convenient to use a pointer for exchange with > userspace, see vgic_v3_cpu_regs_access() and callers. I wouldn't like > to refactor the code again. What's your opinion on this? I still don't think this is a good idea. You can still store the value as an integer in vgic_v3_cpu_regs_access(), and check the write property to do the writeback on read. Which is the same thing I asked for in this patch. > And of course i'll fix up the rest. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
