From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f198.google.com (mail-pf1-f198.google.com [209.85.210.198]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B92DB4B7178 for ; Thu, 3 Sep 2026 14:30:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.198 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788445853; cv=none; b=lRKt7Mz6sQrlmxbq89nSTq8kw+5JdfdrA+fCx2qB+CRMTnuPyr/2Hh3HZ5DlSgRopUOSnSYiakSOzWrdTVBGhIZrVv07ZKz9bNQml2CP66yhEudsfoRIphx1XCEttBSboounyxhwQ5dg+fZbQoRoIb5s/8/ETj7Fhxu/+zqQbX0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788445853; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nqFrkxbwZnIGD0jt6PBMdWC/YYiKHoC8Dbvm0EmPTSA=; h=Date:In-Reply-To:Mime-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=i8I9JyNRKVqyJGLpDOEL+dx5AnpsdFxV7hrgU1qcenbtyONydIc+AHaNNdO13Vj998G1gwwxK/ewsFKkqQmrIgvW/OXhWvptfg5TudwRPJIRVWZ8/pvHXfo8yOncsQmIirrlBJiZZdY1Za4nUyYN/DDmFWj+ZK0PEjLl4JYlQr4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=flex--seanjc.bounces.google.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b=LTFRg1tT; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.198 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=flex--seanjc.bounces.google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="LTFRg1tT" Received: by mail-pf1-f198.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-8535db07af9so1262671b3a.2 for ; Thu, 03 Sep 2026 07:30:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20251104; t=1788445837; x=1789050637; darn=vger.kernel.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=KU72ElW/WJuvWFFEt8qn0cRYWtv7/uUdQgw0J+lE/vo=; b=LTFRg1tTdsTxAzBabBRjIWOvV1FKMSeCKNg8WlA7IdHkRXijCYXbMVxF+gTN3KU0Gl FPSidD1OqgUvWq4wBSdHh/EkXqmYHjf2YRg5eR/kIGNku5L3HJ3GdBo9/ke7VvvIg1/v 0u+jKiM1XkCyONYdstSnMRXf3nKR2UTBFcjgOaQuDEhP1h1FsFBpYm65FvRg1DB8bT/d VVbWsnkVcVXufD9wZ89z5a0T8j3PbBfi/PLiMtxyyyRNJXAYRI4vGcCbq1K/jjxIRWPt nHFkR25kHZcc7O0jEsLbwpIb4rAkVbCFhTCygsCPHLEhX0zBoqMOXAafuCm6JDAa+URZ 5fow== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1788445837; x=1789050637; 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=KU72ElW/WJuvWFFEt8qn0cRYWtv7/uUdQgw0J+lE/vo=; b=eSMPUh5JQSLuwT0ryMb8AAHwYr9ci1lErOAlD1ZFdZVl6l/xbY4IqAMeuBJFCPjcFJ 54wf5vU/m7mKKNznS3wri3XrxoXdxJJ6zkG0ynzG8KPy2YW9y3tGVF2bKiPKTaPiFZrR jufwTibsBUjnEh1LkEMHe48ViE3WJUliGJ1RKvZsom1mxPvcJtbGPjoGe/mNF6G8gkm4 i42Kn6DQsS8YDrgunyl/6r//Yc6zc7IcrPvCnJNFFPiLAazOUwtFKmodQ4SFD8gs+jc1 mD5WEyix8QP9ippO4xU5xpciGyIGcwz5SkJE3+kvbKKGKkRwUlsf4r9vx02q3OvADRaZ KdRQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBzJC9v0HqofqV+8WChFwsIYhadKggDjTTQtdUVh35wBu5f4ZdZ9Rt+uVgcUqKKUmrbk4agmhKtnnt9L@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++mLBrvvkn3vZnKJEMi0L7QdId9bl5BgRdZ5jq7G5eXAmEJpauCr WdDWXiVMtMLyW7RS87mOYgBMZpUMgX2NX6th0pBw1uioTlGGktqhVNXycyVAIrq97YuGd64+g3g 9Lb0scQ== X-Received: from pfll28.prod.google.com ([2002:a05:6a00:159c:b0:84d:f9cf:1f3d]) (user=seanjc job=prod-delivery.src-stubby-dispatcher) by 2002:a05:6a00:4106:b0:847:8449:2ba6 with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-85ed23def83mr20907159b3a.8.1788445836362; Thu, 03 Sep 2026 07:30:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 07:30:35 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20260903114241.33034-C-seiden@linux.ibm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: 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" 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. 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.