From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D6C0C624A4 for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2026 14:32:55 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Type:Cc:To:From: Subject:Message-ID:References:Mime-Version:In-Reply-To:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=jepDX0FobScpvhoQHC25avp5Il/0jZZ+6SCAUX+k/50=; b=xEcsbVqh977znm/hQ+V+0+6gHr dLT5Zs75A57zV41ORSksg2eCuzsR7HGgwzQeO/zbCfvcIrwmhUDCcmwWHCJmhw2LWncmcxHhSUSbK sf9+8DdtOfIXBYyB4gy+cAOHxmCXz6o8AY7Pq+KwCfqMqJtDF7caQcaQOnZZNpKy/Cv6apyVMqyc3 9kxbEnb84p3j2agSXl0qafhiJp3woFlRmD8Csj1gi3vNL8JicCqeYKlTR41iArk4mhJwGaJ525IMF w8UfEh30/yA4y/vsxT+r8Zc9bzEbMD/9vcDaU3eG12VFPSGtjzc7j2fWHUyhuQ0DPKH2DOGjsny5y HmWmDDtQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1x28Ui-0000000HWbJ-3SFw; Thu, 03 Sep 2026 14:32:48 +0000 Received: from mail-pg1-x545.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::545]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1x28Ue-0000000HWaY-3sk6 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 03 Sep 2026 14:32:47 +0000 Received: by mail-pg1-x545.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-ca6bd8a190cso3643241a12.0 for ; Thu, 03 Sep 2026 07:32:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20251104; t=1788445963; x=1789050763; darn=lists.infradead.org; h=content-type:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :in-reply-to:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=jepDX0FobScpvhoQHC25avp5Il/0jZZ+6SCAUX+k/50=; b=GJmkpTgKbxCoeEC+7VYvkYTVc0z2TPqW6kwxN+dQM020tKlneuxBAfjKoI2VIL1QuG kBO6wf/WpJ2381n2mIMhKPYWehVb+6OTlAeFt3zGW2yksG1b/AmX2LfU9+A5K4tXHFkz OjZ42GLe0Ygz/cZXUtHp9wMCOwZph9/BE3vTAfSJxT55qhs/VfpSG9p1OQorc+luIh3m PZUENySVHcWKvhDYP8aA0OvMOPrAuTh6Z9LDoafqWYLGvZbDVkLfZv+0RLYVEHThazDC jXu7mfaMNCcFcCwG9vykGgUqT9f2vyucLRceAQTIp9lba+CaYHFic++CfVFlOpTKPFTr fWLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1788445963; x=1789050763; h=content-type:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :in-reply-to:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=jepDX0FobScpvhoQHC25avp5Il/0jZZ+6SCAUX+k/50=; b=siq5eH/+eiJ7rIG4zMPLpdqZnsw7Cui6x3j5JB/h3ny3II85kPePmoDbXT2j/hfUJx EGkHOvGXzV3XM8YF9Jhlj8X9eYfuin7jLoGoRCd4I9QJwZF/aIEXMvNrzBhP8NORI8iF u/ucT1LeKCJ0ZrKqoLV2MCRLa3dqVHVgJPEFaWMRaFBw3emwULvLm1q5ANgpfarDeNYt AMkCTyKrewDYhC1A7YUjNpzp5QPOwD+fmJiKoSv9YwZKjlaq/3b0U8yK02Y6PWVnha7W gGB3xS4pLmgGwrcLTHKLM+gasM/lr5/gToRXQV+qVXpMSkPl2yiCYdhE4SIMTSBz5YQx X2Iw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvByEbPk2bzFCdIXisScJIssZLJlCyxwdPr2xu6yP74lA8vnhxwIfSeLSmcfqpmeKBBQCdwvnFgJnNUQyQX8zWjHf@lists.infradead.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++lPRrzwVTCyzEUXHhQJ3gqA/2wGQFq1x4RkF1uk8zudv1+qV6fh FptSXUN6g4xnBycroQ+UDxaoeU/PfnPohJFnDkrnZwnVcRLjn9+4iY2oPW6yzvCr0WOd+MoKNYQ elp58rA== X-Received: from pgac2.prod.google.com ([2002:a05:6a02:2942:b0:cc4:37bf:2cab]) (user=seanjc job=prod-delivery.src-stubby-dispatcher) by 2002:a05:6a21:33a8:b0:3d0:6c90:5a33 with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-3d9ad9a2a0bmr20468355637.4.1788445963198; Thu, 03 Sep 2026 07:32:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 07:32:42 -0700 In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20260831144802.834315-1-seiden@linux.ibm.com> <20260831144802.834315-3-seiden@linux.ibm.com> <20260902075028.231001-D-seiden@linux.ibm.com> <20260903114241.33034-C-seiden@linux.ibm.com> Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 02/23] KVM: Make device name configurable From: Sean Christopherson To: Steffen Eiden Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Alexander Gordeev , Andreas Grapentin , Arnd Bergmann , Catalin Marinas , Christian Borntraeger , Claudio Imbrenda , David Hildenbrand , Friedrich Welter , Fuad Tabba , Gautam Gala , Hariharan Mari , Heiko Carstens , Hendrik Brueckner , Ilya Leoshkevich , Janosch Frank , Joey Gouly , Marc Zyngier , Nico Boehr , Nina Schoetterl-Glausch , Oliver Upton , Paolo Bonzini , Suzuki K Poulose , Sven Schnelle , Ulrich Weigand , Vasily Gorbik , Will Deacon , Zenghui Yu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.9.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260903_073244_967322_66D3E6C5 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 32.06 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, Sep 03, 2026, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Thu, Sep 03, 2026, Steffen Eiden wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 02, 2026 at 09:14:21AM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > And taking things a few steps further, we can solve the MMIO issue in a more > > > elegant way, and eliminate the runtime string building in this patch (after looking > > > more closely, that code needs to be jettisoned no matter what, there's simply no > > > reason to specify the names at runtime since they're separate compilation units). > > > > > > Rather than splatter #defines throughout header files, deal with the bulk of the > > > pain in Makefile.kvm. By feeding conditionals into Makefile.kvm, the s390+arm64 > > > build can easily omit coalesced_mmio.o and async_pf.o, define __KVM_HAVE_ARCH_MMIO > > > programatically without having to change other architectures, and solve the naming > > > stuff. > > > > Yes, this is a great idea. Thank you. I second you, this looks more clean > > and stable than the stuff we came up with :) > > Looking more at arch/s390/kvm/Kconfig and virt/kvm/Kconfig, we might need/want to > to build out infrastructure to handle this sort of thing in a more generic fashion? > > Which probably isn't that much infrastructure? It's more just changing how arch > code communicates with common KVM? I.e. instead of providing boolean configs in > virt/kvm/Kconfig, formalize communicating HAVE-type macros through the Makefile. > That might even be a net positive in the long run, as it will make it easier to > provide defaults for the common cases. > > I say that because unless there's magic I'm unaware of these Kconfigs also needs > to be configured per-KVM, not per-kernel: > > - KVM_MMU_LOCKLESS_AGING, otherwise aging on arm64 will unintentionally be done > outside of mmu_lock. > > - KVM_GENERIC_PRE_FAULT_MEMORY, so that arm64 doesn't need to provide a stub > for something it doesn't support > > - HAVE_KVM_MSI, because presumably it's needed for arm64 support. > > - HAVE_KVM_READONLY_MEM, same story as HAVE_KVM_MSI. And in the opposite direction, HAVE_KVM_VCPU_RUN_PID_CHANGE also falls into this category. That one is probably better handled as a #define in header files? > Which isn't _that_ many knobs, but add in KVM_MMIO, KVM_ASYNC_PF, and > KVM_ASYNC_PF_SYNC, and it's enough that I think we should think about the big > picture and not play whack-a-mole. > > Actually, thinking about this more, what I've proposed here, plus the pattern of > #define-ing macros in arch-specific kvm_host.h files, should suffice. For things > like __KVM_HAVE_ARCH_VM_FREE, it absolutely makes sense to #define the macro in > kvm_host.h since it's very directly tied to an arch callback. Whereas with KVM_MIO > and KVM_ASYNC_PF, because they enable compilation of C files, it makes sense to > define them in Makefiles. > > So I think the "gap" is purely that the four knobs listed above need handling > (and arguably KVM_MMU_LOCKLESS_AGING is ok as-proposed). But I do think we should > try our best to be more thoughtful than we usually are when deciding how to enable > common code, because obviously s390+arm64 is adding wrinkles no one has had to deal > with before. >