Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86: rename push to emulate_push for consistency

[Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>]

On Wed, Oct 04, 2023, Julian Stecklina wrote:
> push and emulate_pop are counterparts. Rename push to emulate_push and
> harmonize its function signature with emulate_pop. This should remove
> a bit of cognitive load when reading this code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Julian Stecklina <julian.stecklina@cyberus-technology.de>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c | 11 ++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
> index fc4a365a309f..33f3327ddfa7 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
> @@ -1819,22 +1819,23 @@ static int writeback(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, struct operand *op)
>  	return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
>  }
>  
> -static int push(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, void *data, int bytes)
> +static int emulate_push(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, const unsigned long *data,
> +			u8 op_bytes)

I like the rename and making @data const, but please leave @bytes as an int.

Regarding @bytes versus @len, my vote is to do s/len/bytes for emulate_pop() and
emulate_popf().