On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 7:19 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020, Uros Bizjak wrote: > > Merge __kvm_handle_fault_on_reboot with its sole user > > There's also a comment in vmx.c above kvm_cpu_vmxoff() that should be updated. > Alternatively, and probably preferably for me, what about keeping the long > __kvm_handle_fault_on_reboot() name for the macro itself and simply moving the > __ex() macro? > > That would also allow keeping kvm_spurious_fault() and > __kvm_handle_fault_on_reboot() where they are (for no reason other than to avoid > code churn). Though I'm also ok if folks would prefer to move everything to > x86.h. The new patch is vaguely based on our correspondence on the prototype patch: --q-- Moving this to asm/kvm_host.h is a bit sketchy as __ex() isn't exactly the most unique name. arch/x86/kvm/x86.h would probably be a better destination as it's "private". __ex() is only used in vmx.c, nested.c and svm.c, all of which already include x86.h. --/q-- where you mentioned that x86.h would be a better destination for __ex(). IMO, __kvm_handle_fault_on_reboot also belongs in x86.h, as it deals with a low-level access to the processor, and there is really no reason for this #define to be available for the whole x86 architecture directory. I remember looking for the __kvm_handle_falult_on_reboot, and was surprised to find it in a global x86 include directory. I tried to keep __ex as a redefine to __kvm_hanlde_fault_on_reboot in x86.h, but it just looked weird, since __ex is the only user and the introductory document explains in detail, what __kvm_hanlde_fault_on_reboot (aka __ex) does. Uros.
