Re: [PATCH 02/13] i386: hvf: Drop useless declarations in sysemu

[Claudio Fontana <cfontana@suse.de>]

On 5/28/20 9:37 PM, Roman Bolshakov wrote:
> They're either declared elsewhere or have no use.
> 
> While at it, rename _hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_init() to
> do_hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_init().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Roman Bolshakov <r.bolshakov@yadro.com>
> ---
>  include/sysemu/hvf.h  | 22 ----------------------
>  target/i386/hvf/hvf.c |  7 ++++---
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/sysemu/hvf.h b/include/sysemu/hvf.h
> index 30a565ab73..03f3cd7db3 100644
> --- a/include/sysemu/hvf.h
> +++ b/include/sysemu/hvf.h
> @@ -30,35 +30,13 @@ uint32_t hvf_get_supported_cpuid(uint32_t func, uint32_t idx,
>  #define hvf_get_supported_cpuid(func, idx, reg) 0
>  #endif
>  
> -/* Disable HVF if |disable| is 1, otherwise, enable it iff it is supported by
> - * the host CPU. Use hvf_enabled() after this to get the result. */
> -void hvf_disable(int disable);
> -
> -/* Returns non-0 if the host CPU supports the VMX "unrestricted guest" feature
> - * which allows the virtual CPU to directly run in "real mode". If true, this
> - * allows QEMU to run several vCPU threads in parallel (see cpus.c). Otherwise,
> - * only a a single TCG thread can run, and it will call HVF to run the current
> - * instructions, except in case of "real mode" (paging disabled, typically at
> - * boot time), or MMIO operations. */
> -
> -int hvf_sync_vcpus(void);
> -
>  int hvf_init_vcpu(CPUState *);
>  int hvf_vcpu_exec(CPUState *);
> -int hvf_smp_cpu_exec(CPUState *);
>  void hvf_cpu_synchronize_state(CPUState *);
>  void hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_reset(CPUState *);
>  void hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_init(CPUState *);
> -void _hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_init(CPUState *, run_on_cpu_data);
> -
>  void hvf_vcpu_destroy(CPUState *);
> -void hvf_raise_event(CPUState *);
> -/* void hvf_reset_vcpu_state(void *opaque); */
>  void hvf_reset_vcpu(CPUState *);
> -void vmx_update_tpr(CPUState *);
> -void update_apic_tpr(CPUState *);
> -int hvf_put_registers(CPUState *);
> -void vmx_clear_int_window_exiting(CPUState *cpu);
>  
>  #define TYPE_HVF_ACCEL ACCEL_CLASS_NAME("hvf")
>  
> diff --git a/target/i386/hvf/hvf.c b/target/i386/hvf/hvf.c
> index d72543dc31..9ccdb7e7c7 100644
> --- a/target/i386/hvf/hvf.c
> +++ b/target/i386/hvf/hvf.c
> @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ void vmx_update_tpr(CPUState *cpu)
>      }
>  }
>  
> -void update_apic_tpr(CPUState *cpu)
> +static void update_apic_tpr(CPUState *cpu)
>  {
>      X86CPU *x86_cpu = X86_CPU(cpu);
>      int tpr = rreg(cpu->hvf_fd, HV_X86_TPR) >> 4;
> @@ -312,7 +312,8 @@ void hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_reset(CPUState *cpu_state)
>      run_on_cpu(cpu_state, do_hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_reset, RUN_ON_CPU_NULL);
>  }
>  
> -void _hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_init(CPUState *cpu, run_on_cpu_data arg)
> +static void do_hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_init(CPUState *cpu,
> +                                             run_on_cpu_data arg)
>  {
>      CPUState *cpu_state = cpu;
>      hvf_put_registers(cpu_state);
> @@ -321,7 +322,7 @@ void _hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_init(CPUState *cpu, run_on_cpu_data arg)
>  
>  void hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_init(CPUState *cpu_state)
>  {
> -    run_on_cpu(cpu_state, _hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_init, RUN_ON_CPU_NULL);
> +    run_on_cpu(cpu_state, do_hvf_cpu_synchronize_post_init, RUN_ON_CPU_NULL);
>  }
>  
>  static bool ept_emulation_fault(hvf_slot *slot, uint64_t gpa, uint64_t ept_qual)
> 

in this file (hvf.c) there is a comment:

/* TODO: synchronize vcpu state */

is the TODO still valid after this change? Or should the TODO be eliminated?

Thanks,

Claudio