Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] KVM: s390: clean up redundant 'kvm_run' parameters

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 2020/4/23 0:04, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 17:58:04 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 22.04.20 15:45, Cornelia Huck wrote:
On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 20:58:04 +0800
Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In the current kvm version, 'kvm_run' has been included in the 'kvm_vcpu'
structure. Earlier than historical reasons, many kvm-related function

s/Earlier than/For/ ?
parameters retain the 'kvm_run' and 'kvm_vcpu' parameters at the same time.
This patch does a unified cleanup of these remaining redundant parameters.

Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
index e335a7e5ead7..d7bb2e7a07ff 100644
--- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
+++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
@@ -4176,8 +4176,9 @@ static int __vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  	return rc;
  }
-static void sync_regs_fmt2(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *kvm_run)
+static void sync_regs_fmt2(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  {
+	struct kvm_run *kvm_run = vcpu->run;
  	struct runtime_instr_cb *riccb;
  	struct gs_cb *gscb;
@@ -4235,7 +4236,7 @@ static void sync_regs_fmt2(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *kvm_run)
  		}
  		if (vcpu->arch.gs_enabled) {
  			current->thread.gs_cb = (struct gs_cb *)
-						&vcpu->run->s.regs.gscb;
+						&kvm_run->s.regs.gscb;

Not sure if these changes (vcpu->run-> => kvm_run->) are really worth
it. (It seems they amount to at least as much as the changes advertised
in the patch description.)

Other opinions?

Agreed. It feels kind of random. Maybe just do the first line (move kvm_run from the
function parameter list into the variable declaration)? Not sure if this is better.


There's more in this patch that I cut... but I think just moving
kvm_run from the parameter list would be much less disruptive.


I think there are two kinds of code(`vcpu->run->` and `kvm_run->`), but there will be more disruptive, not less.

Thanks,
Tianjia



[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux