From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] KVM/x86: Enhancements to static calls
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:37:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZnGbpizfefZgO0Q5@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABgObfZCNN4AdzGavqzFANCLq4E5pi+h2+mr9-cysZrFk6bUzw@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Jun 12, 2024, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 3:23 AM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 07 May 2024 21:31:00 +0800, Wei Wang wrote:
> > > This patchset introduces the kvm_x86_call() and kvm_pmu_call() macros to
> > > streamline the usage of static calls of kvm_x86_ops and kvm_pmu_ops. The
> > > current static_call() usage is a bit verbose and can lead to code
> > > alignment challenges, and the addition of kvm_x86_ prefix to hooks at the
> > > static_call() sites hinders code readability and navigation. The use of
> > > static_call_cond() is essentially the same as static_call() on x86, so it
> > > is replaced by static_call() to simplify the code. The changes have gone
> > > through my tests (guest launch, a few vPMU tests, live migration tests)
> > > without an issue.
> > >
> > > [...]
> >
> > Applied to kvm-x86 static_calls. I may or may not rebase these commits
> > depending on what all gets queued for 6.10. There are already three conflicts
> > that I know of, but they aren't _that_ annoying. Yet. :-)
>
> I think it's best if we apply them directly (i.e. not through a pull
> request), on top of everything else in 6.11.
Works for me. I'll maintain the branch so that the code stays in -next, and so
that patches that are destined for 6.12+ are built on the new world, and then
post the rebased patches when the time comes.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-18 14:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-07 13:31 [PATCH v4 0/3] KVM/x86: Enhancements to static calls Wei Wang
2024-05-07 13:31 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] KVM: x86: Replace static_call_cond() with static_call() Wei Wang
2024-05-07 13:31 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] KVM: x86: Introduce kvm_x86_call() to simplify static calls of kvm_x86_ops Wei Wang
2024-05-07 13:31 ` [PATCH v4 3/3] KVM: x86/pmu: Add kvm_pmu_call() to simplify static calls of kvm_pmu_ops Wei Wang
2024-06-12 1:18 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] KVM/x86: Enhancements to static calls Sean Christopherson
2024-06-12 1:55 ` Wang, Wei W
2024-06-12 10:19 ` Paolo Bonzini
2024-06-18 14:37 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZnGbpizfefZgO0Q5@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=wei.w.wang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox