On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 10:00:52PM -0700, Xin Li (Intel) wrote:
> No need to use MAX_POSSIBLE_PASSTHROUGH_MSRS in the definition of array
> vmx_possible_passthrough_msrs, as the macro name indicates the _possible_
> maximum size of passthrough MSRs.
>
> Use ARRAY_SIZE instead of MAX_POSSIBLE_PASSTHROUGH_MSRS when the size of
> the array is needed and add a BUILD_BUG_ON to make sure the actual array
> size does not exceed the possible maximum size of passthrough MSRs.
This commit message needs to talk about the why - not the what. Latter should
be visible from the diff itself.
What you're not talking about is the sneaked increase of
MAX_POSSIBLE_PASSTHROUGH_MSRS to 64. Something you *should* mention because
the array is full and blablabla...
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
> index e0d76d2460ef..e7409f8f28b1 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/vmx.h
> @@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ struct vcpu_vmx {
> struct lbr_desc lbr_desc;
>
> /* Save desired MSR intercept (read: pass-through) state */
> -#define MAX_POSSIBLE_PASSTHROUGH_MSRS 16
> +#define MAX_POSSIBLE_PASSTHROUGH_MSRS 64
^^^
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
