On 11/6/24 04:07, Zhao Liu wrote:
kvm_install_msr_filters() uses KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES as the bound when traversing msr_handlers[], while other places still compute the size by ARRAY_SIZE(msr_handlers). In fact, msr_handlers[] is an array with the fixed size KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES, so there is no difference between the two ways. For the code consistency and to avoid additional computational overhead, use KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES instead of ARRAY_SIZE(msr_handlers).
I agree with the consistency but I'd go the other direction. Paolo
Suggested-by: Zide Chen <zide.chen@xxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@xxxxxxxxx> Reviewed-by: Zide Chen <zide.chen@xxxxxxxxx> --- v4: new commit. --- target/i386/kvm/kvm.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/target/i386/kvm/kvm.c b/target/i386/kvm/kvm.c index 013c0359acbe..501873475255 100644 --- a/target/i386/kvm/kvm.c +++ b/target/i386/kvm/kvm.c @@ -5885,7 +5885,7 @@ static int kvm_filter_msr(KVMState *s, uint32_t msr, QEMURDMSRHandler *rdmsr, { int i, ret;- for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(msr_handlers); i++) {+ for (i = 0; i < KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES; i++) { if (!msr_handlers[i].msr) { msr_handlers[i] = (KVMMSRHandlers) { .msr = msr, @@ -5911,7 +5911,7 @@ static int kvm_handle_rdmsr(X86CPU *cpu, struct kvm_run *run) int i; bool r;- for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(msr_handlers); i++) {+ for (i = 0; i < KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES; i++) { KVMMSRHandlers *handler = &msr_handlers[i]; if (run->msr.index == handler->msr) { if (handler->rdmsr) { @@ -5931,7 +5931,7 @@ static int kvm_handle_wrmsr(X86CPU *cpu, struct kvm_run *run) int i; bool r;- for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(msr_handlers); i++) {+ for (i = 0; i < KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES; i++) { KVMMSRHandlers *handler = &msr_handlers[i]; if (run->msr.index == handler->msr) { if (handler->wrmsr) {
