public inbox for kvm@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
To: Colton Lewis <coltonlewis@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
	Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] KVM: arm64: Add early_param to control WFx trapping
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 19:09:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZmyVYQG_wC9rRonF@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240523174056.1565133-1-coltonlewis@google.com>

On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 05:40:55PM +0000, Colton Lewis wrote:
> Add an early_params to control WFI and WFE trapping. This is to
> control the degree guests can wait for interrupts on their own without
> being trapped by KVM. Options for each param are trap and notrap. trap
> enables the trap. notrap disables the trap. Note that when enabled,
> traps are allowed but not guaranteed by the CPU architecture. Absent
> an explicitly set policy, default to current behavior: disabling the
> trap if only a single task is running and enabling otherwise.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Colton Lewis <coltonlewis@google.com>
> ---
> v6:
>  * Rebase to v6.9.1

As in from the stable tree? Please base your patches on an -rc tag, and
especially one from this release cycle.

> +static bool kvm_vcpu_should_clear_twi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> +	if (likely(kvm_wfi_trap_policy == KVM_WFX_NOTRAP_SINGLE_TASK))
> +		return single_task_running() &&
> +			(atomic_read(&vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v3.its_vpe.vlpi_count) ||
> +			 vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic.nassgireq);
> +
> +	return kvm_wfi_trap_policy == KVM_WFX_NOTRAP;
> +}

Generally, it is more readable to organize your code in such a way that
multiline statements are unnested as much as possible. So if you were to
invert the if condition it'd become a bit cleaner.

Here is what I plan on squashing into this patch,
kvm_vcpu_should_clear_twe() got the same treatment for the sake of
consistency.

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
index 9cddd1096b0a..53e23528d2cf 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/arm.c
@@ -557,20 +557,20 @@ static void vcpu_set_pauth_traps(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 
 static bool kvm_vcpu_should_clear_twi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 {
-	if (likely(kvm_wfi_trap_policy == KVM_WFX_NOTRAP_SINGLE_TASK))
-		return single_task_running() &&
-			(atomic_read(&vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v3.its_vpe.vlpi_count) ||
-			 vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic.nassgireq);
+	if (unlikely(kvm_wfi_trap_policy != KVM_WFX_NOTRAP_SINGLE_TASK))
+		return kvm_wfi_trap_policy == KVM_WFX_NOTRAP;
 
-	return kvm_wfi_trap_policy == KVM_WFX_NOTRAP;
+	return single_task_running() &&
+	       (atomic_read(&vcpu->arch.vgic_cpu.vgic_v3.its_vpe.vlpi_count) ||
+		vcpu->kvm->arch.vgic.nassgireq);
 }
 
 static bool kvm_vcpu_should_clear_twe(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 {
-	if (likely(kvm_wfe_trap_policy == KVM_WFX_NOTRAP_SINGLE_TASK))
-		return single_task_running();
+	if (unlikely(kvm_wfe_trap_policy != KVM_WFX_NOTRAP_SINGLE_TASK))
+		return kvm_wfe_trap_policy == KVM_WFX_NOTRAP;
 
-	return kvm_wfe_trap_policy == KVM_WFX_NOTRAP;
+	return single_task_running();
 }
 
 void kvm_arch_vcpu_load(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int cpu)

-- 
Thanks,
Oliver

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-06-14 19:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-05-23 17:40 [PATCH v6] KVM: arm64: Add early_param to control WFx trapping Colton Lewis
2024-06-14 16:25 ` Jing Zhang
2024-06-14 19:09 ` Oliver Upton [this message]
2024-06-14 20:12 ` Oliver Upton
2024-06-17 18:22   ` Colton Lewis

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=ZmyVYQG_wC9rRonF@linux.dev \
    --to=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=coltonlewis@google.com \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yuzenghui@huawei.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox