From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Longpeng (Mike)" <longpeng2@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm: x86: correct the misleading comment in vmx_handle_external_intr
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:15:37 +0800
Message-ID: <57FD8EB9.9020400@huawei.com>
References: <1476059023-33224-1-git-send-email-longpeng2@huawei.com> <20161011182337.GB16406@potion>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: <pbonzini@redhat.com>, <tglx@linutronix.de>, <mingo@redhat.com>,
        <hpa@zytor.com>, <x86@kernel.org>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <zhaoshenglong@huawei.com>,
        <richard.weiyang@huawei.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20161011182337.GB16406@potion>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

Hi Radim,

On 2016/10/12 2:23, Radim Krčmář wrote:

> This part is acceptable as it gives a new information code, yet the
> function does not modify flags, which makes it unremarkable.
> And dependencies on the caller would be better described in a header
> (if we cannot express them well in the code).
> 
> The most comment-worthy thing about this function is the reason why we
> execute the interrupt handler manually, i.e. the dependency on
> VM_EXIT_ACK_INTR_ON_EXIT, but that is easy to tell from the commit
> message and convenient access to git history is essential in a workflow,
> so providing a leeway could be counter-productive.
> 
> I would go with no comment for now.
> 
> .
> 

Thanks for your patience, and your advice is useful for me.

In addition, the comment below is misleading too, hope you can fix it
simultaneously.

	/* Interrupt is enabled by handle_external_intr() */
	kvm_x86_ops->handle_external_intr(vcpu);

-- 
Regards,
Longpeng(Mike)