From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pj1-f74.google.com (mail-pj1-f74.google.com [209.85.216.74]) (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 0141A150997 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2026 20:06:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.74 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776715585; cv=none; b=l7H4qHLRFLuTKPVTZR9puJDKquP2hWEXyIopB6NBJT14gJO01KvlXT4IavKHWfP+K85r0rT21BNCLVZhJ7KFYzKRREj67p4SBVJ4nfT88EHLWGzvcFG4gSPND0t4EbrvSmdQXPIUTNjiBLn84IZSkvmcu9wVVDECGkZUpCoMEdM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776715585; c=relaxed/simple; bh=b89JOdWc2tHnz0JBm0XSYjGwA2IuoPpOvjwTZ1/Lux0=; h=Date:In-Reply-To:Mime-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:From: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=bkrXD82KPdILc8QX7TCP2uqm4QzkbUXEyMRPI388AClUIh6BFTzHBWONWaESkOBMf9tyqf+8BRK8AKijadTEXxRY29HjzwP/hKeBQdZr8bQkPh1wObWFXlMZmwQ1P7lkdBzdstfOe4OXUGw5P2tu5mnlMhMaVUkue8fE0kwe8uE= 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=YiOg2IZw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.74 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="YiOg2IZw" Received: by mail-pj1-f74.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-35e59791605so3393592a91.1 for ; Mon, 20 Apr 2026 13:06:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20251104; t=1776715583; x=1777320383; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=cc:to:from:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:in-reply-to :date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=TZxYUqD2nNuvPN56vUHQyfWGRkh1zwfXr7oE1wyS0SA=; b=YiOg2IZwECi4JjZYtAuxAV14MYNvGcVz1aHoE8x+Za/ECgqn1EogsMh3Vtecw2M8FG 7jfWfAt2CclzIE0GZe7Il3Jpfg5WFlxqZVrDpsX2HqQFz1/+FsKU7mRFBOsnWsyh1A2U /1Scf2m3+E9WaEMu73LNWrd0yO6CbW6gzX5f4h5uBBJVRqjFp7SqzdmTKyKCcn2YPwwi iH4h7TEgvOGmebZgH92HGH7fVZK7IZbKpWtBQmGvA3yp5bMLs/px80BtGcQeIaIY2D6p hKF86jsPMqLnkOWHXyaOh8CWP/FwFvmCDW7VBrV/4qpH97yEf12HvHVTwL3L5pASIHKD HC9A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1776715583; x=1777320383; h=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=TZxYUqD2nNuvPN56vUHQyfWGRkh1zwfXr7oE1wyS0SA=; b=TjoEsM1+DArJlZYrVJwmSvreqs2Cs1x4oNIKuboFCBr7Do/X+VRxc18f+0mUPMG6ko Hqu8T51RXXMXHw4iPfsm1NJg6hxw+4U93pwNpZhAdgVa5jm6bAAFKVWkg1bFDqo9m5rH 1/ZpvlK+bLFJJlBnIdy1pkjDJNiZ8Vb9ZTacZ/DxVoTDPUSspidPvWWe4gy6Rd7VhjVP oQE/LlwnggxGNrmBORzdx9ya54OCckWwRFZlJqCf84hmgKsNQWXndmluX6tNmydNuBVM sHhvP+tMVjeVHRT3gRX8X662Hx6bsJ5VEx/aRDYoybeUgBcX/oF9u16cENLKFxRDHTqw 7Tlg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AFNElJ99df2EwuCyqTFGwDX5NlsJr5ZUyHwO4OYdfJuf+3HeIYcjH6ozA+yTtKFRoHI0xEy1nAKQ7FrfQ9A=@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YycdXZUNIUnbLlrTCbnzVnW7blEtiiyvYmMovl3uLoF45gURJcj VAKdLjLg/iqSL52kX03+JNHeD5Xsx4H+12xDDJXPsdwdKIybmh5tDrbg8v2B4W8PtCV9K+ukivu gWdl9OQ== X-Received: from pjbkx16.prod.google.com ([2002:a17:90b:2290:b0:35f:c299:a451]) (user=seanjc job=prod-delivery.src-stubby-dispatcher) by 2002:a17:90b:164a:b0:35b:96bb:47ba with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-361404c0ca8mr14786253a91.26.1776715583185; Mon, 20 Apr 2026 13:06:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2026 13:06:21 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20260220004223.4168331-2-dmatlack@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: loongarch@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 References: <20260220004223.4168331-1-dmatlack@google.com> <20260220004223.4168331-2-dmatlack@google.com> Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] KVM: selftests: Use gva_t instead of vm_vaddr_t From: Sean Christopherson To: David Matlack Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Ackerley Tng , Albert Ou , Alexandre Ghiti , Andrew Jones , Anup Patel , Atish Patra , Bibo Mao , Christian Borntraeger , Claudio Imbrenda , Colin Ian King , David Hildenbrand , Fuad Tabba , Huacai Chen , James Houghton , Janosch Frank , Joey Gouly , kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, Lisa Wang , loongarch@lists.linux.dev, Marc Zyngier , Maxim Levitsky , Nutty Liu , Oliver Upton , Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Walmsley , "Pratik R. Sampat" , Rahul Kumar , Shuah Khan , Suzuki K Poulose , Tianrui Zhao , Wu Fei , Yosry Ahmed , Zenghui Yu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Fri, Feb 20, 2026, David Matlack wrote: > Replace all occurrences of vm_vaddr_t with gva_t to align with KVM code > and with the conversion helpers (e.g. addr_gva2hva()). Also replace > vm_vaddr in function names with gva to align with the new type name. ... > @@ -716,22 +716,22 @@ void vm_mem_region_move(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t slot, uint64_t new_gpa); > void vm_mem_region_delete(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t slot); > struct kvm_vcpu *__vm_vcpu_add(struct kvm_vm *vm, uint32_t vcpu_id); > void vm_populate_vaddr_bitmap(struct kvm_vm *vm); > -vm_vaddr_t vm_vaddr_unused_gap(struct kvm_vm *vm, size_t sz, vm_vaddr_t vaddr_min); > -vm_vaddr_t vm_vaddr_alloc(struct kvm_vm *vm, size_t sz, vm_vaddr_t vaddr_min); > -vm_vaddr_t __vm_vaddr_alloc(struct kvm_vm *vm, size_t sz, vm_vaddr_t vaddr_min, > - enum kvm_mem_region_type type); > -vm_vaddr_t vm_vaddr_alloc_shared(struct kvm_vm *vm, size_t sz, > - vm_vaddr_t vaddr_min, > - enum kvm_mem_region_type type); > -vm_vaddr_t vm_vaddr_alloc_pages(struct kvm_vm *vm, int nr_pages); > -vm_vaddr_t __vm_vaddr_alloc_page(struct kvm_vm *vm, > - enum kvm_mem_region_type type); > -vm_vaddr_t vm_vaddr_alloc_page(struct kvm_vm *vm); > +gva_t gva_unused_gap(struct kvm_vm *vm, size_t sz, gva_t vaddr_min); > +gva_t gva_alloc(struct kvm_vm *vm, size_t sz, gva_t vaddr_min); > +gva_t __gva_alloc(struct kvm_vm *vm, size_t sz, gva_t vaddr_min, > + enum kvm_mem_region_type type); > +gva_t gva_alloc_shared(struct kvm_vm *vm, size_t sz, > + gva_t vaddr_min, > + enum kvm_mem_region_type type); > +gva_t gva_alloc_pages(struct kvm_vm *vm, int nr_pages); > +gva_t __gva_alloc_page(struct kvm_vm *vm, > + enum kvm_mem_region_type type); > +gva_t gva_alloc_page(struct kvm_vm *vm); The existing vm_vaddr_alloc() and friends are pretty bad names. gva_alloc() is far, far worse. The APIs aren't just allocation a guest virtual address, they're allocating guest physical memory, finding a usable virtual address, and creating mappings. I don't see any reason to have vaddr or gva in the name. E.g. malloc() isn't virt_malloc(). But I do think they need to be explicitly scoped to KVM, and to a VM. I'll drop API renames from this patch, and rename them to vm_alloc() and friends in a separate patch. Amusingly, that naming scheme will still work if "vm" is misconstrued as "virtual memory" instead of "virtual machine". P.S. This is a great example of why I insist on one logical change per patch, with judicious exemptions for opportunistic cleanups/changes. If this has been a separate patch, it would have taken me all of two seconds to unwind. As it was, I spent a good 10-15 minutes dealing with this. In large part because I kept making goofs, but that's the whole point: there was no reason to put me in a position to make goofs. The other argument against these sorts of "Also do xyz" add-ons is that of a slippery slope. Why rename these APIs in this patch, but not the myriad vaddr variables? Then after a few "I'll just clean this up too" changes, there's an entire series in what is purportedly just a typedef rename.