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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 460DBCDB482 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 16:58:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234681AbjJPQ6t (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Oct 2023 12:58:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57280 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233874AbjJPQ6E (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Oct 2023 12:58:04 -0400 Received: from mail-yb1-xb49.google.com (mail-yb1-xb49.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b49]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6472C2D78 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 09:55:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb49.google.com with SMTP id 3f1490d57ef6-d9a3942461aso7006045276.2 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 09:55:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1697475333; x=1698080133; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:in-reply-to:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=8GT/z1ak4XuGAz/SY84LFvhbfN3QKtjdD824dfmf1Ho=; b=ktcAhKXJyTjYihST/28QnaiP6mAdSzWiW1Fe5a1ooONlwkCR2fKk+thiDmj5R4uKFt 4kvPkdA4MngQqdwovAC+o5PfJRG+m3UIa7+FMGn18kzGAAo1kW97a7YMuYJSCrLpGtx7 3knXhDdIsECohJov+rJr77fScYlx2Gft/kq/J06Ffw6Ewszm6hakJK2TuF0PJGwXPKpl bzqgE7Y2ezrMyvPYVyqbpaG6R/Tb9xMhiC1UoUiq26/DoOWcvFQiqDgfxxWU6WdCn6ay 27wXFdh2+qjCa0y5xbWZ3xuXk1GAYc682NFXekc36BHgdi5NOu50mQjYEsHiC3d5U8GA L8zg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697475333; x=1698080133; h=content-transfer-encoding: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; bh=8GT/z1ak4XuGAz/SY84LFvhbfN3QKtjdD824dfmf1Ho=; b=WoYROjng49kCE0I+mXNABIrwqURFWh0lx8lwocvKMfelf/FgN3NzOLe6yWIegdwmEf M04g9rqVScCq+2LEPW4e/+xFFi/+CGditH3irOLazlgc+QynrfAhk9P+RV+RkDprjVq5 7Q6nCSPX6t/dFfXurSHb+KANTkZCRHv/eZKbZy1J593b3yUZMFaV38HscBRiBaRuv8/Y 6Nd66rYRj8NGvWZqHHUbovXKXH+g8uk7Yi2QIHWe+1kK3Gkkx7rFKGcZzVNWYuSt/XLN kRsrFWwE9r8rNvk9DApKJeLo4PcYfPPyOHDvBEuk6ESq2ke+Bu3MJBDW5/F4HvsRYri2 tB4Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxc08QayuKSEagcvKypIzZBEY7ABidh4ZPZ89gZFm5vFxU4acBB 2udhegvngGdRoWnE2p2VQ0GI3uBrpyw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFGWqa5ayuh9VVkxZ5Ayl/aVGx+n4GQCBQ9Uczr4uSCdcIZ9w43tae31i5swOOzW2PKhYknuAtm6Vc= X-Received: from zagreus.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:cc00:7f:e700:c0a8:5c37]) (user=seanjc job=sendgmr) by 2002:a25:b08f:0:b0:d9a:4a62:69e9 with SMTP id f15-20020a25b08f000000b00d9a4a6269e9mr405724ybj.13.1697475333586; Mon, 16 Oct 2023 09:55:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2023 09:55:32 -0700 In-Reply-To: <87edhu8yoj.fsf@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20231010160300.1136799-1-vkuznets@redhat.com> <20231010160300.1136799-9-vkuznets@redhat.com> <406f20dc55db24dffda2e01a1ccf7a7135c61604.camel@redhat.com> <87edhu8yoj.fsf@redhat.com> Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 08/11] KVM: nVMX: hyper-v: Introduce nested_vmx_evmptr() accessor From: Sean Christopherson To: Vitaly Kuznetsov Cc: Maxim Levitsky , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 16, 2023, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > Maxim Levitsky writes: >=20 > > =D0=A3 =D0=B2=D1=82, 2023-10-10 =D1=83 18:02 +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov = =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5: > >> 'vmx->nested.hv_evmcs_vmptr' accesses are all over the place so hiding > >> 'hv_evmcs_vmptr' under 'ifdef CONFIG_KVM_HYPERV' would take a lot of > >> ifdefs. Introduce 'nested_vmx_evmptr()' accessor instead. > > > > > > It might also make sense to have 'nested_evmptr_valid(vmx)' "is_valid" please so that it's clear the helper is a check, not a declarati= on. > > so that we could use it instead of 'evmptr_is_valid(nested_vmx_evmptr(v= mx))'? > > >=20 > Makes sense, thanks! Would it be accurate to call it nested_vmx_is_evmptr12_valid()? If so, tha= t has my vote. It's a bit verbose, but it should be fully self-explanatory for a= nyone that's familiar with KVM's vmcs12 and vmcb12 terminology.