From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DC21651FCA3 for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2026 17:45:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790790306; cv=none; b=YvV/ahWPnckQ6awU4jNaCsiMjNitXwBrxuxQj7b6lPLF4ncKVccYxqXG3JrikEmHBUwoXGF0GsQ+1VW7FS6ID/cDTcqpmCneaUYXS9igN/xY7DD0wzu6FEW0m3NcIYG4OdIVKevHGI6gq2e0UgM6nWmKa9jifUQWocIn0iBX9iE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790790306; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QS5F1n1s9CDwc6oy/33YqVDcDHBHLLzroXk8J+709nk=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=bmJb6OVt1RoD7S5NRR2xOGq3aaYc0rVxY0qHhpE0hKyqj00OZlzq+PSx6pqUYIHQgrNuzvettEmdNPKYRPAZfwjjwVwpXfbUPP5jmgDGyq/FkxCp1SiixGIWJeevLXF6F57cLgL8pWBrXqiTrrsW82Snr6siN/BpxU/pHfnTY0s= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=l0lMekkC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="l0lMekkC" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7738F1F00898; Wed, 30 Sep 2026 17:45:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1790790304; bh=XkkVWaUc8J9qyS7e3/lX6P/rM5N7jo8HEa6ij+DOMV8=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=l0lMekkCOBAbowlgpdVb1zphQ3NC+xvdKd2BaUpZ9ALbH1xSwaL6edXH/6p+Gg8cP GfiTqp58lRfuWJ0NgDKSlshlqstOPt1MkGFYcBBdKlrn1+JpKHG3g9VD9Zs5l05m+W gODddD6hZA7ytEN+Bbv3Aw2qbYn2ryzOV6qVkytY5qlJr6+fZ7NLRLjvwZJJTt5le2 0SPljaRVqmOFeXdHJAWI8eeJ8BpcfDcuYvhkN6fFKe7DnGJgSzpvwaJoRGVUqdFgQ/ W3KBieicadeqX5nqYftSyYFhvZXFz9mGwguLM+IBdUpMr7C4dzt7Ha0Nt1x/J/JqR4 xL7TZgXuDxN3Q== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/21] KVM: selftests: Rename TSC freq checkers in nested TSC scaling test Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Sean Christopherson" Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20260930173635.3362655-9-seanjc@google.com> References: <20260930173635.3362655-1-seanjc@google.com> <20260930173635.3362655-9-seanjc@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2026 17:45:04 +0000 Message-Id: <20260930174504.7738F1F00898@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] selftests: guest_check_tsc_freq name contradicts commit message sem= antics -- commit 7c759b101cdd9e99d261e6f3022bcb5096eeadfb Author: Sean Christopherson KVM: selftests: Rename TSC freq checkers in nested TSC scaling test This commit renames the nested TSC scaling test helpers to clarify guest vs host usage. It aims to emphasize that the host version performs the actual assertion check on the result. > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/nested_tsc_scaling_test.c b/= tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/nested_tsc_scaling_test.c > index 84312146e93f6..e5fc4c9bb9f9b 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/nested_tsc_scaling_test.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/x86/nested_tsc_scaling_test.c [ ... ] > @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ static void compare_tsc_freq(u64 actual, u64 expected) > actual, thresh_low, thresh_high); > } > =20 > -static void check_tsc_freq(int level) > +static void guest_check_tsc_freq(int level) [Severity: Low] The commit message states the goal is to make it more obvious that the host version *checks* the result and asserts on errors. However, renaming the guest helper to guest_check_tsc_freq implies it also performs validation, whereas it merely measures the frequency and invokes GUEST_CHECK() to pass the value back to the host for verification. Would a name like guest_measure_tsc_freq be more semantically accurate given the commit's stated intent? > { > u64 tsc_start, tsc_end, tsc_freq; > --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260930173635.3362= 655-1-seanjc@google.com?part=3D8