All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/16] KVM: MMU: return bool in __rmap_write_protect
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 23:14:55 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120416231455.f978b3ac9fb995cfce2853ae@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F8AB02A.9020601@redhat.com>

On Sun, 15 Apr 2012 14:25:30 +0300
Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:

> > > @@ -1689,7 +1690,7 @@ static void mmu_sync_children(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> > > 
> > >  	kvm_mmu_pages_init(parent, &parents, &pages);
> > >  	while (mmu_unsync_walk(parent, &pages)) {
> > > -		int protected = 0;
> > > +		bool protected = false;
> > > 
> > >  		for_each_sp(pages, sp, parents, i)
> > >  			protected |= rmap_write_protect(vcpu->kvm, sp->gfn);
> >
> > Isn't this the reason we prefer int to bool?
> >
> > Not sure people like to use |= with boolean.
> >
> 
> Why not?
> 

The code "bitwise OR assignment" is assuming the internal representations
of true and false: true=1, false=0.

I might have seen some point if it had been
	protected = protected || rmap_...


But the real question is whether there is any point in re-writing completely
correct C code: there are tons of int like this in the kernel code.

__rmap_write_protect() was introduced recently, so if this conversion is
really worthwhile, I should have been told to use bool at that time, no?


Thanks,
	Takuya

  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-16 14:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-13 10:05 [PATCH v2 00/16] KVM: MMU: fast page fault Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:09 ` [PATCH v2 01/16] KVM: MMU: cleanup __direct_map Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:10 ` [PATCH v2 02/16] KVM: MMU: introduce mmu_spte_establish Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:10 ` [PATCH v2 03/16] KVM: MMU: properly assert spte on rmap walking path Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-14  2:15   ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-16  3:26     ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:11 ` [PATCH v2 04/16] KVM: MMU: return bool in __rmap_write_protect Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-14  2:00   ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-15 11:25     ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-16 14:14       ` Takuya Yoshikawa [this message]
2012-04-16 14:28         ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-16 15:54           ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-13 10:11 ` [PATCH v2 05/16] KVM: MMU: abstract spte write-protect Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-14  2:26   ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-16  3:27     ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:12 ` [PATCH v2 06/16] KVM: VMX: export PFEC.P bit on ept Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:12 ` [PATCH v2 07/16] KVM: MMU: introduce for_each_pte_list_spte Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-14  2:44   ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-16  3:36     ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-17 14:47       ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-18  4:01         ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-21  1:01           ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-21  4:36             ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-18 10:03         ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-21  1:03           ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-13 10:13 ` [PATCH v2 08/16] KVM: MMU: store more bits in rmap Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:13 ` [PATCH v2 09/16] KVM: MMU: fast mmu_need_write_protect path for hard mmu Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:14 ` [PATCH v2 10/16] KVM: MMU: fask check whether page is writable Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-14  3:01   ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-16  3:38     ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-15 15:16   ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-16  3:25     ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-16 10:02       ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-16 10:20         ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-16 11:47           ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-17  3:55             ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-17  7:41               ` Avi Kivity
2012-04-17 12:10                 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:14 ` [PATCH v2 11/16] KVM: MMU: introduce SPTE_ALLOW_WRITE bit Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:15 ` [PATCH v2 12/16] KVM: MMU: introduce SPTE_WRITE_PROTECT bit Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:15 ` [PATCH v2 13/16] KVM: MMU: break sptes write-protect if gfn is writable Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:16 ` [PATCH v2 14/16] KVM: MMU: fast path of handling guest page fault Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-18  1:47   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-04-18  3:53     ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-18 23:08       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-04-13 10:17 ` [PATCH v2 15/16] KVM: MMU: trace fast " Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-13 10:17 ` [PATCH v2 16/16] KVM: MMU: fix kvm_mmu_pagetable_walk tracepoint Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-14  3:37 ` [PATCH v2 00/16] KVM: MMU: fast page fault Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-16  3:50   ` Xiao Guangrong

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=20120416231455.f978b3ac9fb995cfce2853ae@gmail.com \
    --to=takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    --cc=xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.