On 21.01.20 14:48, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> The wrappers make it less clear that the position of the call
> to kvm_arch_async_page_present depends on the architecture, and
> that only one of the two call sites will actually be active.
> Remove them.
>
> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx>
looks sane. The binary code also looks identical.
Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> virt/kvm/async_pf.c | 21 ++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/async_pf.c b/virt/kvm/async_pf.c
> index d8ef708a2ef6..15e5b037f92d 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/async_pf.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/async_pf.c
> @@ -17,21 +17,6 @@
> #include "async_pf.h"
> #include <trace/events/kvm.h>
>
> -static inline void kvm_async_page_present_sync(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> - struct kvm_async_pf *work)
> -{
> -#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_ASYNC_PF_SYNC
> - kvm_arch_async_page_present(vcpu, work);
> -#endif
> -}
> -static inline void kvm_async_page_present_async(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> - struct kvm_async_pf *work)
> -{
> -#ifndef CONFIG_KVM_ASYNC_PF_SYNC
> - kvm_arch_async_page_present(vcpu, work);
> -#endif
> -}
> -
> static struct kmem_cache *async_pf_cache;
>
> int kvm_async_pf_init(void)
> @@ -80,7 +65,8 @@ static void async_pf_execute(struct work_struct *work)
> if (locked)
> up_read(&mm->mmap_sem);
>
> - kvm_async_page_present_sync(vcpu, apf);
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KVM_ASYNC_PF_SYNC))
> + kvm_arch_async_page_present(vcpu, apf);
>
> spin_lock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
> list_add_tail(&apf->link, &vcpu->async_pf.done);
> @@ -157,7 +143,8 @@ void kvm_check_async_pf_completion(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> spin_unlock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
>
> kvm_arch_async_page_ready(vcpu, work);
> - kvm_async_page_present_async(vcpu, work);
> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KVM_ASYNC_PF_SYNC))
> + kvm_arch_async_page_present(vcpu, work);
>
> list_del(&work->queue);
> vcpu->async_pf.queued--;
>
