Re: [PATCH 4/4] KVM MMU: do not intercept invlpg if 'oos_shadow' is disabled

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

On 05/05/2010 03:54 PM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>
> Avi Kivity wrote:
>    
>> On 04/30/2010 12:05 PM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>>      
>>> If 'oos_shadow' == 0, intercepting invlpg command is really
>>> unnecessary.
>>>
>>> And it's good for us to compare the performance between enable
>>> 'oos_shadow'
>>> and disable 'oos_shadow'
>>>
>>> @@ -74,8 +74,9 @@ static int dbg = 0;
>>>    module_param(dbg, bool, 0644);
>>>    #endif
>>>
>>> -static int oos_shadow = 1;
>>> +int __read_mostly oos_shadow = 1;
>>>    module_param(oos_shadow, bool, 0644);
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(oos_shadow);
>>>
>>>        
>> Please rename to kvm_oos_shadow to reduce potential for conflict with
>> other global names.
>>
>> But really, this is a debug option, I don't expect people to run with
>> oos_shadow=0, so there's not much motivation to optimize it.
>>      
> Agreed, but, 'oos_shadow' option is document in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt,
> if it's just a debug option, i think we do better not document it.
>    

It has to be documented, otherwise people complain :)

Anyway the variable name and the option name don't have to be the same 
(I think).

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function