> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023, Shiyuan Gao wrote: > > In vmx, ept_level looks better than tdp level and is consistent with > > svm get_npt_level(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Shiyuan Gao <gaoshiyuan@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:gaoshiyuan@xxxxxxxxx>> > > --- > > arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > > index df461f387e20..f0cfd1f10a06 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.c > > @@ -3350,7 +3350,7 @@ void vmx_set_cr0(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long cr0) > > vmx->emulation_required = vmx_emulation_required(vcpu); > > } > > > > -static int vmx_get_max_tdp_level(void) > > +static int vmx_get_max_ept_level(void) > > { > > if (cpu_has_vmx_ept_5levels()) > > return 5; > > @@ -8526,7 +8526,7 @@ static __init int hardware_setup(void) > > */ > > vmx_setup_me_spte_mask(); > > > > - kvm_configure_mmu(enable_ept, 0, vmx_get_max_tdp_level(), > > + kvm_configure_mmu(enable_ept, 0, vmx_get_max_ept_level(), > > ept_caps_to_lpage_level(vmx_capability.ept)); > > > Anyone else have an opinion on this? I'm leaning toward applying it, but a small > part of me also kinda likes the "tdp" name (though every time I look at this patch > that part of me gets even smaller...). > Remind, please look at this patch again :)
