| Message ID | 20240121111730.262429-5-foxywang@tencent.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | KVM: irqchip: synchronize srcu only if needed | expand |
On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 07:17:30PM +0800, Yi Wang wrote: > As we have setup empty irq routing in kvm_create_vm(), there's > no need to setup dummy routing when KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP. > > Signed-off-by: Yi Wang <foxywang@tencent.com> > --- > arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 13 +++++-------- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > index acc81ca6492e..7c836c973b75 100644 > --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > @@ -2999,14 +2999,11 @@ int kvm_arch_vm_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int ioctl, unsigned long arg) > break; > } > case KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP: { > - struct kvm_irq_routing_entry routing; > - > - r = -EINVAL; > - if (kvm->arch.use_irqchip) { > - /* Set up dummy routing. */ > - memset(&routing, 0, sizeof(routing)); > - r = kvm_set_irq_routing(kvm, &routing, 0, 0); > - } > + /* > + * As we have set up empty routing, there is no need to > + * setup dummy routing here. > + */ Where exactly? In the context of this patch series it is rather obvious, but this comment does not stand on its own. You can either throw the reader a bone by mentioning where the dummy routing is created or just drop the comment altogether. > + r = 0; > break; > } > case KVM_SET_DEVICE_ATTR: { > -- > 2.39.3 >
On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 2:54 AM Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev> wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 07:17:30PM +0800, Yi Wang wrote: > > As we have setup empty irq routing in kvm_create_vm(), there's > > no need to setup dummy routing when KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP. > > > > Signed-off-by: Yi Wang <foxywang@tencent.com> > > --- > > arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 13 +++++-------- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > > index acc81ca6492e..7c836c973b75 100644 > > --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > > +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c > > @@ -2999,14 +2999,11 @@ int kvm_arch_vm_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int ioctl, unsigned long arg) > > break; > > } > > case KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP: { > > - struct kvm_irq_routing_entry routing; > > - > > - r = -EINVAL; > > - if (kvm->arch.use_irqchip) { > > - /* Set up dummy routing. */ > > - memset(&routing, 0, sizeof(routing)); > > - r = kvm_set_irq_routing(kvm, &routing, 0, 0); > > - } > > + /* > > + * As we have set up empty routing, there is no need to > > + * setup dummy routing here. > > + */ > > Where exactly? > > In the context of this patch series it is rather obvious, but this > comment does not stand on its own. You can either throw the reader a > bone by mentioning where the dummy routing is created or just drop the > comment altogether. Yeap, you are right. I will drop this in the upcoming patch. > > > + r = 0; > > break; > > } > > case KVM_SET_DEVICE_ATTR: { > > -- > > 2.39.3 > > > > -- > Thanks, > Oliver
diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c index acc81ca6492e..7c836c973b75 100644 --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c @@ -2999,14 +2999,11 @@ int kvm_arch_vm_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int ioctl, unsigned long arg) break; } case KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP: { - struct kvm_irq_routing_entry routing; - - r = -EINVAL; - if (kvm->arch.use_irqchip) { - /* Set up dummy routing. */ - memset(&routing, 0, sizeof(routing)); - r = kvm_set_irq_routing(kvm, &routing, 0, 0); - } + /* + * As we have set up empty routing, there is no need to + * setup dummy routing here. + */ + r = 0; break; } case KVM_SET_DEVICE_ATTR: {
As we have setup empty irq routing in kvm_create_vm(), there's no need to setup dummy routing when KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP. Signed-off-by: Yi Wang <foxywang@tencent.com> --- arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 13 +++++-------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)