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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF05AC55185 for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 03:19:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99B0B2073A for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 03:19:11 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 99B0B2073A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4972b11GyczDr2J for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 13:19:09 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com (client-ip=47.88.44.36; helo=out4436.biz.mail.alibaba.com; envelope-from=tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Received: from out4436.biz.mail.alibaba.com (out4436.biz.mail.alibaba.com [47.88.44.36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4972Vb3FmkzDqjX for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2020 13:15:19 +1000 (AEST) X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS; BC=-1|-1; BR=01201311R351e4; CH=green; DM=||false|; DS=||; FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1; HT=e01e07484; MF=tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com; NM=1; PH=DS; RN=36; SR=0; TI=SMTPD_---0TwNry4Z_1587611689; Received: from 30.27.118.66(mailfrom:tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0TwNry4Z_1587611689) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Thu, 23 Apr 2020 11:14:51 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] KVM: s390: clean up redundant 'kvm_run' parameters To: Christian Borntraeger , Cornelia Huck References: <20200422125810.34847-1-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> <20200422125810.34847-2-tianjia.zhang@linux.alibaba.com> <20200422154543.2efba3dd.cohuck@redhat.com> From: Tianjia Zhang Message-ID: Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2020 11:14:49 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: wanpengli@tencent.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, david@redhat.com, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, peterx@redhat.com, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, frankja@linux.ibm.com, maz@kernel.org, joro@8bytes.org, x86@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com, thuth@redhat.com, gor@linux.ibm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, bp@alien8.de, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jmattson@google.com, tsbogend@alpha.franken.de, christoffer.dall@arm.com, sean.j.christopherson@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, vkuznets@redhat.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" 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 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 >>> --- >>> 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