From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>
Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] KVM: x86/pmu: Add KVM_PMU_CALL() to simplify static calls of kvm_pmu_ops
Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 16:36:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZjQjYiwBg1jGmdUq@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240425125252.48963-4-wei.w.wang@intel.com>
On Thu, Apr 25, 2024, Wei Wang wrote:
> #define KVM_X86_CALL(func) static_call(kvm_x86_##func)
> +#define KVM_PMU_CALL(func) static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_##func)
...
> @@ -796,7 +796,7 @@ void kvm_pmu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu);
>
> memset(pmu, 0, sizeof(*pmu));
> - static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_init)(vcpu);
> + KVM_PMU_CALL(init)(vcpu);
> kvm_pmu_refresh(vcpu);
I usually like macros to use CAPS so that they're clearly macros, but in this
case I find the code a bit jarring. Essentially, I *want* my to be fooled into
thinking it's a function call, because that's really what it is.
So rather than all caps, what if we follow function naming style? E.g.
memset(pmu, 0, sizeof(*pmu));
kvm_pmu_call(init)(vcpu);
kvm_pmu_refresh(vcpu);
and
if (lapic_in_kernel(vcpu)) {
kvm_pmu_call(deliver_pmi)(vcpu);
kvm_apic_local_deliver(vcpu->arch.apic, APIC_LVTPC);
}
and
switch (msr) {
case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS:
case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL:
case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_OVF_CTRL:
return kvm_pmu_has_perf_global_ctrl(vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu));
default:
break;
}
return kvm_pmu_call(msr_idx_to_pmc)(vcpu, msr) ||
kvm_pmu_call(is_valid_msr)(vcpu, msr);
all are easier for my brain to parse.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-02 23:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-25 12:52 [PATCH v3 0/3] KVM/x86: Enhancements to static calls Wei Wang
2024-04-25 12:52 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] KVM: x86: Replace static_call_cond() with static_call() Wei Wang
2024-04-25 12:52 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] KVM: x86: Introduce KVM_X86_CALL() to simplify static calls of kvm_x86_ops Wei Wang
2024-04-25 12:52 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] KVM: x86/pmu: Add KVM_PMU_CALL() to simplify static calls of kvm_pmu_ops Wei Wang
2024-05-02 23:36 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-05-03 2:15 ` Wang, Wei W
2024-05-03 13:24 ` Sean Christopherson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZjQjYiwBg1jGmdUq@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=wei.w.wang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).