[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kvm
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/12] KVM: Allow range-based TLB invalidation from common code
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc () google ! com>
Date: 2023-07-31 21:55:14
Message-ID: ZMgtwp/YCZciRvdr () google ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
On Sat, Jul 22, 2023, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> index ec169f5c7dce..eb88d25f9896 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> @@ -278,16 +278,15 @@ static inline bool kvm_available_flush_remote_tlbs_range(void)
> return kvm_x86_ops.flush_remote_tlbs_range;
> }
>
> -void kvm_flush_remote_tlbs_range(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t start_gfn,
> - gfn_t nr_pages)
> +int kvm_arch_flush_remote_tlbs_range(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t start_gfn, u64 pages)
Please keep "nr_pages", I have a very strong preference for that over just "pages"
as the "nr_" makes it super obvious that it's a single number, as opposed to an
array of pages or something.
And it doesn't truly matter, but IMO the gfn_t type is more appropriate since
the gfn and the number of pages need to have the same type.
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic