Re: [PATCH] kvm: remove one useless check extension

Re: [PATCH] kvm: remove one useless check extension

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 04/05/2015 04:48, Tiejun Chen wrote:
> We already check KVM_CAP_IRQFD in generic once enable CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_IRQFD,
> 
> kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension_generic()
>     |
>     + switch (arg) {
>     +   ...
>     +   #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_IRQFD
>     +       case KVM_CAP_IRQFD:
>     +   #endif
>     +   ...
>     +   return 1;
>     +   ...
>     + }
>     |
>     + kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension()
> 
> So its not necessary to check this in arch again, and also fix one typo,
> s/emlation/emulation.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/kvm/arm.c       | 1 -
>  include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> index d9631ec..483b5d1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> @@ -171,7 +171,6 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
>  	int r;
>  	switch (ext) {
>  	case KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP:
> -	case KVM_CAP_IRQFD:
>  	case KVM_CAP_IOEVENTFD:
>  	case KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL:
>  	case KVM_CAP_USER_MEMORY:
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> index 4b60056..2fa7302 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> @@ -894,7 +894,7 @@ struct kvm_xen_hvm_config {
>   *
>   * KVM_IRQFD_FLAG_RESAMPLE indicates resamplefd is valid and specifies
>   * the irqfd to operate in resampling mode for level triggered interrupt
> - * emlation.  See Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt.
> + * emulation.  See Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt.
>   */
>  #define KVM_IRQFD_FLAG_RESAMPLE (1 << 1)
>  
> 

Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>

Christoffer/Marc, please apply to the ARM tree in order to avoid
pointless conflicts in kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension.

Paolo

Re: [PATCH] kvm: remove one useless check extension

[Christoffer Dall]

On Mon, May 04, 2015 at 11:24:22AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 04/05/2015 04:48, Tiejun Chen wrote:
> > We already check KVM_CAP_IRQFD in generic once enable CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_IRQFD,
> > 
> > kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension_generic()
> >     |
> >     + switch (arg) {
> >     +   ...
> >     +   #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_IRQFD
> >     +       case KVM_CAP_IRQFD:
> >     +   #endif
> >     +   ...
> >     +   return 1;
> >     +   ...
> >     + }
> >     |
> >     + kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension()
> > 
> > So its not necessary to check this in arch again, and also fix one typo,
> > s/emlation/emulation.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/kvm/arm.c       | 1 -
> >  include/uapi/linux/kvm.h | 2 +-
> >  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> > index d9631ec..483b5d1 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/arm.c
> > @@ -171,7 +171,6 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension(struct kvm *kvm, long ext)
> >  	int r;
> >  	switch (ext) {
> >  	case KVM_CAP_IRQCHIP:
> > -	case KVM_CAP_IRQFD:
> >  	case KVM_CAP_IOEVENTFD:
> >  	case KVM_CAP_DEVICE_CTRL:
> >  	case KVM_CAP_USER_MEMORY:
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> > index 4b60056..2fa7302 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/kvm.h
> > @@ -894,7 +894,7 @@ struct kvm_xen_hvm_config {
> >   *
> >   * KVM_IRQFD_FLAG_RESAMPLE indicates resamplefd is valid and specifies
> >   * the irqfd to operate in resampling mode for level triggered interrupt
> > - * emlation.  See Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt.
> > + * emulation.  See Documentation/virtual/kvm/api.txt.
> >   */
> >  #define KVM_IRQFD_FLAG_RESAMPLE (1 << 1)
> >  
> > 
> 
> Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> 
> Christoffer/Marc, please apply to the ARM tree in order to avoid
> pointless conflicts in kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension.
> 
Applied, thanks.

-Christoffer