From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Will Auld <will.auld.intel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Added call parameter to track whether invocation
 originated with guest or elsewhere
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:58:20 -0700
Message-ID: <1350943100.5232.1.camel@WillAuldHomeLinux>
References: <1350439833.8785.27.camel@WillAuldHomeLinux>
	 <507E89F5.4000301@redhat.com> <20121017140918.GA4940@amt.cnet>
	 <507EC079.3050908@redhat.com>
Reply-To: will.auld@intel.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, will.auld@intel.com,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, xiantao.zhang@intel.com, jinsong.liu@intel.com
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:43487 "EHLO
	mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755787Ab2JVV6X (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 22 Oct 2012 17:58:23 -0400
Received: by mail-pb0-f46.google.com with SMTP id rr4so2318338pbb.19
        for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:58:23 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <507EC079.3050908@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 16:28 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 10/17/2012 04:09 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 12:35:33PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >> On 10/17/2012 04:10 AM, Will Auld wrote:
> >> > Signed-off-by: Will Auld <will.auld@intel.com>
> >> > ---
> >> > 
> >> > Resending to full list
> >> > 
> >> > Marcelo,
> >> > 
> >> > This patch is what I believe you ask for as foundational for later
> >> > patches to address IA32_TSC_ADJUST. 
> >> > 
> >> 
> >> Please write a changelog to reflect the motivation.
> >> 
> >> All those bool parameters scattered all over the place aren't very
> >> pretty.  Usually we solve this with helpers that embed the parameter
> >> name (kvm_set_msr() vs. kvm_set_msr_host()) but there are too many
> >> functions for this to work here.
> >> 
> >> Marcelo, any ideas?
> > 
> > Its easier to read
> > 
> > kvm_x86_ops->kvm_set_msr()
> > kvm_x86_ops->kvm_set_msr_host()
> > 
> > then
> > 
> > kvm_x86_ops->kvm_set_msr(,false)
> > kvm_x86_ops->kvm_set_msr(,true)
> > 
> > So you're right.
> 
> Yes, but we have a million functions for setting MSRs.
> 
> Maybe
> 
> struct msr {
>     bool host_requested;
>     u32 index;
>     u64 data;
> };
> 
> and change all the APIs to use that.
> 
> 

I was working on a different solution and then saw this suggestion just
now. I like this tact and will look at it closer. 

Thanks,

Will