On 01/10/2018 18:20, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On 27/09/2018 13:07, Roman Kagan wrote: > ... >>> >>> I must say that now it looks even more tempting to follow the same >>> pattern as your kvm_hv_flush_tlb: define a function that would call >>> kvm_apic_set_irq() on all vcpus in a mask (optimizing the all-set case >>> with a NULL mask), and make kvm_hv_send_ipi perform the same hv_vp_set >>> -> vcpu_mask transformation followed by calling into that function. >> >> >> It would perhaps be cleaner, but really kvm_apic_set_irq is as efficient >> as it can be, since it takes the destination vcpu directly. >> >> The code duplication for walking the sparse set is a bit ugly, perhaps >> that could be changed to use an iterator macro. > > I actually like Roman's suggestion on how to re-write kvm_hv_flush_tlb() > and I also agree that it would be easier for future readers if we write > kvm_hv_send_ipi() in a similar way. Actually, I already have v7 in my > stash, will be sending it out shortly. Just send follow ups now, please. I already have enough long queue. :) Paolo
