Re: [RFC PATCH v4 4/7] KVM: pfncache: Rename invalidate_start() helper

[Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>]

On Fri, May 01, 2026, Ackerley Tng wrote:
> Takahiro Itazuri <itazur@amazon.com> writes:
> 
> > Rename gfn_to_pfn_cache_invalidate_start() to
> > gpc_invalidate_hva_range_start() to explicitly indicate that it takes a
> > range of HVA range.
> >
> > No functional changes intended.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Takahiro Itazuri <itazur@amazon.com>
> > ---
> >  virt/kvm/kvm_main.c |  2 +-
> >  virt/kvm/kvm_mm.h   | 12 ++++++------
> >  virt/kvm/pfncache.c |  4 ++--
> >  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > index 5871882ff1db..d64e70f8e8e3 100644
> > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > @@ -763,7 +763,7 @@ static int kvm_mmu_notifier_invalidate_range_start(struct mmu_notifier *mn,
> >  	 * mn_active_invalidate_count (see above) instead of
> >  	 * mmu_invalidate_in_progress.
> >  	 */
> > -	gfn_to_pfn_cache_invalidate_start(kvm, range->start, range->end);
> > +	gpc_invalidate_hva_range_start(kvm, range->start, range->end);
> 
> Is this actually not specific to the start? It may be called from the
> MMU notifier's .invalidate_range_start hook, but since we're renaming
> it, perhaps just gpc_invalidate_hva_range() would be more suitable.

Before we touch this name, we need to bottom out on optimizing gpc invalidation,
because odds are good the behavior and thus the "best" name could end up being
quite different.

https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZrJIA6t8S9Ucjqzn@google.com