Re: [PATCH v8 3/8] KVM: x86/pmu: Rename and move vcpu_get_perf_capabilities() to pmu.h

["Chen, Zide" <zide.chen@intel.com>]

On 8/17/2026 1:52 PM, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [Low] Header files pmu.h and pmu_intel.h lack required includes, violating self-contained header practices.
> --
> 
> --- Patch [3]: [PATCH v8 3/8] KVM: x86/pmu: Rename and move vcpu_get_perf_capabilities() to pmu.h ---
> commit 7eb009fb5328b80368e10acda6cfe621b3e1e1c0
> Author: Zide Chen <zide.chen@intel.com>
> 
> KVM: x86/pmu: Rename and move vcpu_get_perf_capabilities() to pmu.h
> 
> This commit renames vcpu_get_perf_capabilities() to kvm_vcpu_get_perf_caps()
> and moves it to the common x86 PMU header. This prepares the function to be
> called from common x86 code to check the guest's PERF_METRICS capability.
> 
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
>> index 090c9bbb74f48..82f955e5a4507 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.h
> [ ... ]
>> @@ -271,6 +271,14 @@ static inline bool kvm_pmu_is_fastpath_emulation_allowed(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  				  X86_PMC_IDX_MAX);
>>  }
>>  
>> +static inline u64 kvm_vcpu_get_perf_caps(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +{
>> +	if (!guest_cpu_cap_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_PDCM))
>> +		return 0;
> 
> [Severity: Low]
> Does this file need to include cpuid.h? guest_cpu_cap_has() is used here,
> but pmu.h does not include the header that defines it.

Copied from my reply in v7 review:

It sounds reasonable, but I'd prefer to keep it as-is.

Adding cpuid.h to pmu.h would make pmu.h more self-contained, but it
would also naturally lead to removing now-redundant cpuid.h includes
from PMU-related files such as vmx/pmu_intel.c, svm/pmu.c, and
potentially others.

I'd like to keep the current patch focused on the functional change and
avoid mixing it with include dependency cleanup.


>> +
>> +	return vcpu->arch.perf_capabilities;
>> +}
>> +
>>  void kvm_pmu_deliver_pmi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> [ ... ]
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.h b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.h
>> index 5d9357640aa18..dd447d8b6fdde 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx/pmu_intel.h
>> @@ -4,19 +4,9 @@
>>  
>>  #include <linux/kvm_host.h>
>>  
>> -#include "cpuid.h"
>> -
>> -static inline u64 vcpu_get_perf_capabilities(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> -{
>> -	if (!guest_cpu_cap_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_PDCM))
>> -		return 0;
>> -
>> -	return vcpu->arch.perf_capabilities;
>> -}
>> -
>>  static inline bool fw_writes_is_enabled(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  {
>> -	return (vcpu_get_perf_capabilities(vcpu) & PERF_CAP_FW_WRITES) != 0;
>> +	return (kvm_vcpu_get_perf_caps(vcpu) & PERF_CAP_FW_WRITES) != 0;
> 
> [Severity: Low]
> Should pmu_intel.h include pmu.h? It calls kvm_vcpu_get_perf_caps() which
> is now defined in pmu.h, but the include appears to be missing.
> 
>>  }
>>  
>>  bool intel_pmu_lbr_is_enabled(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>