Arnd,
On Thu, Oct 29 2020 at 10:51, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 8:04 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 28/10/20 22:20, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > Avoid this by renaming the global 'apic' variable to the more descriptive
>> > 'x86_system_apic'. It was originally called 'genapic', but both that
>> > and the current 'apic' seem to be a little overly generic for a global
>> > variable.
>>
>> The 'apic' affects only the current CPU, so one of 'x86_local_apic',
>> 'x86_lapic' or 'x86_apic' is probably preferrable.
>
> Ok, I'll change it to x86_local_apic then, unless someone else has
> a preference between them.
x86_local_apic is fine with me.
> I think ideally there would be no global variable, withall accesses
> encapsulated in function calls, possibly using static_call() optimizations
> if any of them are performance critical.
There are a bunch, yes.
> It doesn't seem hard to do, but I'd rather leave that change to
> an x86 person ;-)
It's not hard, but I'm not really sure whether it buys much.
Can you please redo that against tip x86/apic. Much of what you are
touching got a major overhaul.
Thanks,
tglx
