Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] KVM: s390: clean up redundant 'kvm_run' parameters

Tianjia Zhang
2020-04-23T03:14:49Z

On 2020/4/22 23:58, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
>
> On 22.04.20 15:45, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Apr 2020 20:58:04 +0800
>> Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In the current kvm version, 'kvm_run' has been included in the 'kvm_vcpu'
>>> structure. Earlier than historical reasons, many kvm-related function
>>
>> s/Earlier than/For/ ?
>>
>>> parameters retain the 'kvm_run' and 'kvm_vcpu' parameters at the same time.
>>> This patch does a unified cleanup of these remaining redundant parameters.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tianjia Zhang <tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>>> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> index e335a7e5ead7..d7bb2e7a07ff 100644
>>> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
>>> @@ -4176,8 +4176,9 @@ static int __vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> return rc;
>>> }
>>>
>>> -static void sync_regs_fmt2(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *kvm_run)
>>> +static void sync_regs_fmt2(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>> {
>>> + struct kvm_run *kvm_run = vcpu->run;
>>> struct runtime_instr_cb *riccb;
>>> struct gs_cb *gscb;
>>>
>>> @@ -4235,7 +4236,7 @@ static void sync_regs_fmt2(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *kvm_run)
>>> }
>>> if (vcpu->arch.gs_enabled) {
>>> current->thread.gs_cb = (struct gs_cb *)
>>> - &vcpu->run->s.regs.gscb;
>>> + &kvm_run->s.regs.gscb;
>>
>> Not sure if these changes (vcpu->run-> => kvm_run->) are really worth
>> it. (It seems they amount to at least as much as the changes advertised
>> in the patch description.)
>>
>> Other opinions?
>
> Agreed. It feels kind of random. Maybe just do the first line (move kvm_run from the
> function parameter list into the variable declaration)? Not sure if this is better.
>

Why not, `kvm_run` is equivalent to `vcpu->run`, which is also part of
the cleanup, or do you mean to put this change in another patch?

Thanks,
Tianjia