From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] KVM/x86: Enhancements to static calls
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:37:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZnGbpizfefZgO0Q5@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABgObfZCNN4AdzGavqzFANCLq4E5pi+h2+mr9-cysZrFk6bUzw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jun 12, 2024, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 3:23 AM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 07 May 2024 21:31:00 +0800, Wei Wang wrote:
> > > This patchset introduces the kvm_x86_call() and kvm_pmu_call() macros to
> > > streamline the usage of static calls of kvm_x86_ops and kvm_pmu_ops. The
> > > current static_call() usage is a bit verbose and can lead to code
> > > alignment challenges, and the addition of kvm_x86_ prefix to hooks at the
> > > static_call() sites hinders code readability and navigation. The use of
> > > static_call_cond() is essentially the same as static_call() on x86, so it
> > > is replaced by static_call() to simplify the code. The changes have gone
> > > through my tests (guest launch, a few vPMU tests, live migration tests)
> > > without an issue.
> > >
> > > [...]
> >
> > Applied to kvm-x86 static_calls. I may or may not rebase these commits
> > depending on what all gets queued for 6.10. There are already three conflicts
> > that I know of, but they aren't _that_ annoying. Yet. :-)
>
> I think it's best if we apply them directly (i.e. not through a pull
> request), on top of everything else in 6.11.
Works for me. I'll maintain the branch so that the code stays in -next, and so
that patches that are destined for 6.12+ are built on the new world, and then
post the rebased patches when the time comes.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-18 14:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-07 13:31 [PATCH v4 0/3] KVM/x86: Enhancements to static calls Wei Wang
2024-05-07 13:31 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] KVM: x86: Replace static_call_cond() with static_call() Wei Wang
2024-05-07 13:31 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] KVM: x86: Introduce kvm_x86_call() to simplify static calls of kvm_x86_ops Wei Wang
2024-05-07 13:31 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] KVM: x86/pmu: Add kvm_pmu_call() to simplify static calls of kvm_pmu_ops Wei Wang
2024-06-12 1:18 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] KVM/x86: Enhancements to static calls Sean Christopherson
2024-06-12 1:55 ` Wang, Wei W
2024-06-12 10:19 ` Paolo Bonzini
2024-06-18 14:37 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
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=ZnGbpizfefZgO0Q5@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 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.