From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/19] x86/VPMU: Minor VPMU cleanup Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 15:26:38 +0100 Message-ID: <537A30BE0200007800013B96@mail.emea.novell.com> References: <1399996413-1998-1-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> <1399996413-1998-4-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1399996413-1998-4-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Boris Ostrovsky Cc: kevin.tian@intel.com, keir@xen.org, suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, donald.d.dugger@intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, dietmar.hahn@ts.fujitsu.com, jun.nakajima@intel.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On 13.05.14 at 17:53, wrote: > Update macros that modify VPMU flags to allow changing multiple bits at once. > > Make sure that we only touch MSR bitmap on HVM guests (both VMX and SVM). > This is needed by subsequent PMU patches. This part is at least questionable - why would these bitmaps not similarly be used by PVH? And if so, this second change is kind of a policy one, while the first change is a purely mechanical one. I.e. I don't think they fit well together into a single patch. > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vpmu_core2.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vpmu_core2.c > @@ -326,16 +326,14 @@ static int core2_vpmu_save(struct vcpu *v) > { > struct vpmu_struct *vpmu = vcpu_vpmu(v); > > - if ( !vpmu_is_set(vpmu, VPMU_CONTEXT_SAVE) ) > - return 0; > - > - if ( !vpmu_is_set(vpmu, VPMU_CONTEXT_LOADED) ) > + if ( !vpmu_is_set_all(vpmu, VPMU_CONTEXT_SAVE | VPMU_CONTEXT_LOADED) ) Is this really a good name? How about vpmu_are_all_set() or vpmu_all_set()? Jan