Re: [PATCH 1/5] KVM: arm/arm64: tidy 'should sleep' conditions

Marc Zyngier
2017-10-05T08:12:40Z

On 29/09/17 12:30, Andrew Jones wrote:
> Introduce vcpu_should_sleep() in order to tidy several places up
> that the compound 'power_off || pause' condition is used.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
> ---
> virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 18 +++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> index b9f68e4add71..e4bec508ee5b 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> @@ -403,17 +403,22 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_mpstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static bool vcpu_should_sleep(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> +{
> + return vcpu->arch.power_off || vcpu->arch.pause;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable - determine if the vcpu can be scheduled
> - * @v: The VCPU pointer
> + * @vcpu: The VCPU pointer
> *
> * If the guest CPU is not waiting for interrupts or an interrupt line is
> * asserted, the CPU is by definition runnable.
> */
> -int kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(struct kvm_vcpu *v)
> +int kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> - return ((!!v->arch.irq_lines || kvm_vgic_vcpu_pending_irq(v))
> - && !v->arch.power_off && !v->arch.pause);
> + return (!!vcpu->arch.irq_lines || kvm_vgic_vcpu_pending_irq(vcpu))
> + && !vcpu_should_sleep(vcpu);
> }
>
> bool kvm_arch_vcpu_in_kernel(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> @@ -570,10 +575,9 @@ static void vcpu_req_sleep(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> {
> struct swait_queue_head *wq = kvm_arch_vcpu_wq(vcpu);
>
> - swait_event_interruptible(*wq, ((!vcpu->arch.power_off) &&
> - (!vcpu->arch.pause)));
> + swait_event_interruptible(*wq, !vcpu_should_sleep(vcpu));
>
> - if (vcpu->arch.power_off || vcpu->arch.pause) {
> + if (vcpu_should_sleep(vcpu)) {
> /* Awaken to handle a signal, request we sleep again later. */
> kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_SLEEP, vcpu);
> }
>

Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>

M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...