On 21/04/21 05:25, lihaiwei.kernel@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Haiwei Li <lihaiwei@xxxxxxxxxxx>
`kvm_arch_dy_runnable` checks the pending_interrupt as the code in
`kvm_arch_dy_has_pending_interrupt`. So take advantage of it.
Signed-off-by: Haiwei Li <lihaiwei@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 21 +++++++++------------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index d696a9f..08bd616 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -11125,28 +11125,25 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
return kvm_vcpu_running(vcpu) || kvm_vcpu_has_events(vcpu);
}
-bool kvm_arch_dy_runnable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+bool kvm_arch_dy_has_pending_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
- if (READ_ONCE(vcpu->arch.pv.pv_unhalted))
- return true;
-
- if (kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_NMI, vcpu) ||
- kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_SMI, vcpu) ||
- kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu))
- return true;
-
if (vcpu->arch.apicv_active && static_call(kvm_x86_dy_apicv_has_pending_interrupt)(vcpu))
return true;
return false;
}
-bool kvm_arch_dy_has_pending_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+bool kvm_arch_dy_runnable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
- if (vcpu->arch.apicv_active && static_call(kvm_x86_dy_apicv_has_pending_interrupt)(vcpu))
+ if (READ_ONCE(vcpu->arch.pv.pv_unhalted))
return true;
- return false;
+ if (kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_NMI, vcpu) ||
+ kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_SMI, vcpu) ||
+ kvm_test_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu))
+ return true;
+
+ return kvm_arch_dy_has_pending_interrupt(vcpu);
}
bool kvm_arch_vcpu_in_kernel(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
Looks good, but I'd like to take a look at the other patches for
directed yield first. Thanks!
Paolo
