On Mon, Sep 13, 2021, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Use vcpu_idx to identify vCPU0 when updating HyperV's TSC page, which is > > shared by all vCPUs and "owned" by vCPU0 (because vCPU0 is the only vCPU > > that's guaranteed to exist). Using kvm_get_vcpu() to find vCPU works, > > but it's a rather odd and suboptimal method to check the index of a given > > vCPU. > > > > No functional change intended. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > index 86539c1686fa..6ab851df08d1 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > > @@ -2969,7 +2969,7 @@ static int kvm_guest_time_update(struct kvm_vcpu *v) > > offsetof(struct compat_vcpu_info, time)); > > if (vcpu->xen.vcpu_time_info_set) > > kvm_setup_pvclock_page(v, &vcpu->xen.vcpu_time_info_cache, 0); > > - if (v == kvm_get_vcpu(v->kvm, 0)) > > + if (!v->vcpu_idx) > > kvm_hv_setup_tsc_page(v->kvm, &vcpu->hv_clock); > > return 0; > > } > > " ... instead of walking vCPUs array" in the Subject line is a bit > confusing because kvm_get_vcpu() doesn't actually walk anything, it just > returns 'kvm->vcpus[i]' after checking that we actually have that many > vCPUs. The patch itself is OK, so Argh, yes, I have a feeling I wrote the changelog after digging into the history of kvm_get_vcpu(). Paolo, can you tweak the shortlog to: KVM: x86: Identify vCPU0 by its vcpu_idx instead of its vCPUs array entry
