On Sun, Apr 07, 2024 at 01:36:46PM +0800,
Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > index b361d948140f..1b189e86a1f1 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > @@ -440,6 +440,15 @@ static void kvm_user_return_msr_cpu_online(void)
> > }
> > }
> > +static void kvm_user_return_register_notifier(struct kvm_user_return_msrs *msrs)
> > +{
> > + if (!msrs->registered) {
> > + msrs->urn.on_user_return = kvm_on_user_return;
> > + user_return_notifier_register(&msrs->urn);
> > + msrs->registered = true;
> > + }
> > +}
> > +
> > int kvm_set_user_return_msr(unsigned slot, u64 value, u64 mask)
> > {
> > unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
> > @@ -454,15 +463,21 @@ int kvm_set_user_return_msr(unsigned slot, u64 value, u64 mask)
> > return 1;
> > msrs->values[slot].curr = value;
> > - if (!msrs->registered) {
> > - msrs->urn.on_user_return = kvm_on_user_return;
> > - user_return_notifier_register(&msrs->urn);
> > - msrs->registered = true;
> > - }
> > + kvm_user_return_register_notifier(msrs);
> > return 0;
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_set_user_return_msr);
> > +/* Update the cache, "curr", and register the notifier */
> Not sure this comment is necessary, since the code is simple.
Ok, let's remove it.
> > +void kvm_user_return_update_cache(unsigned int slot, u64 value)
>
> As a public API, is it better to use "kvm_user_return_msr_update_cache"
> instead of "kvm_user_return_update_cache"?
> Although it makes the API name longer...
Yes, other functions consistently user user_return_msr. We should do so.
--
Isaku Yamahata <isaku.yamahata@xxxxxxxxx>
