On 27/03/17 18:03, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > On 27/03/17 17:03, Marc Zyngier wrote: >> There is a lot of duplication in the pmu_*_el0_disabled helpers, >> and as we're going to modify them shortly, let's move all the >> common stuff in a single function. >> >> No functionnal change. > > nit: s/functionnal/functional > >> >> Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx> >> --- >> arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 25 +++++++++++-------------- >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c >> index 0e26f8c2b56f..7e1d673304d5 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c >> @@ -460,35 +460,32 @@ static void reset_pmcr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct sys_reg_desc *r) >> vcpu_sys_reg(vcpu, PMCR_EL0) = val; >> } >> >> -static bool pmu_access_el0_disabled(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) >> +static bool check_disabled(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 flags) > > minor nit: check_disabled sounds too generic for a helper which checks for > something specific to pmuserenr_el0 register in a file where we deal with > lot of system registers. check_pmu_access_disabled() ? Fair enough. I'll fix that. Thanks, M. -- Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
