| Message ID | 20240425125252.48963-4-wei.w.wang@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | KVM/x86: Enhancements to static calls | expand |
On Thu, Apr 25, 2024, Wei Wang wrote: > #define KVM_X86_CALL(func) static_call(kvm_x86_##func) > +#define KVM_PMU_CALL(func) static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_##func) ... > @@ -796,7 +796,7 @@ void kvm_pmu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu); > > memset(pmu, 0, sizeof(*pmu)); > - static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_init)(vcpu); > + KVM_PMU_CALL(init)(vcpu); > kvm_pmu_refresh(vcpu); I usually like macros to use CAPS so that they're clearly macros, but in this case I find the code a bit jarring. Essentially, I *want* my to be fooled into thinking it's a function call, because that's really what it is. So rather than all caps, what if we follow function naming style? E.g. memset(pmu, 0, sizeof(*pmu)); kvm_pmu_call(init)(vcpu); kvm_pmu_refresh(vcpu); and if (lapic_in_kernel(vcpu)) { kvm_pmu_call(deliver_pmi)(vcpu); kvm_apic_local_deliver(vcpu->arch.apic, APIC_LVTPC); } and switch (msr) { case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_STATUS: case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL: case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_OVF_CTRL: return kvm_pmu_has_perf_global_ctrl(vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu)); default: break; } return kvm_pmu_call(msr_idx_to_pmc)(vcpu, msr) || kvm_pmu_call(is_valid_msr)(vcpu, msr); all are easier for my brain to parse.
On Friday, May 3, 2024 7:36 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Thu, Apr 25, 2024, Wei Wang wrote: > > #define KVM_X86_CALL(func) static_call(kvm_x86_##func) > > +#define KVM_PMU_CALL(func) static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_##func) > > ... > > > @@ -796,7 +796,7 @@ void kvm_pmu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu); > > > > memset(pmu, 0, sizeof(*pmu)); > > - static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_init)(vcpu); > > + KVM_PMU_CALL(init)(vcpu); > > kvm_pmu_refresh(vcpu); > > I usually like macros to use CAPS so that they're clearly macros, but in this case > I find the code a bit jarring. Essentially, I *want* my to be fooled into thinking > it's a function call, because that's really what it is. > > So rather than all caps, what if we follow function naming style? E.g. Yep, it looks good to me, and the coding-style doc mentions that "CAPITALIZED macro names are appreciated but macros resembling functions may be named in lower case". To maintain consistency, maybe apply the same lower-case style for KVM_X86_CALL()?
On Fri, May 03, 2024, Wei W Wang wrote: > On Friday, May 3, 2024 7:36 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2024, Wei Wang wrote: > > > #define KVM_X86_CALL(func) static_call(kvm_x86_##func) > > > +#define KVM_PMU_CALL(func) static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_##func) > > > > ... > > > > > @@ -796,7 +796,7 @@ void kvm_pmu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > > struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu); > > > > > > memset(pmu, 0, sizeof(*pmu)); > > > - static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_init)(vcpu); > > > + KVM_PMU_CALL(init)(vcpu); > > > kvm_pmu_refresh(vcpu); > > > > I usually like macros to use CAPS so that they're clearly macros, but in this case > > I find the code a bit jarring. Essentially, I *want* my to be fooled into thinking > > it's a function call, because that's really what it is. > > > > So rather than all caps, what if we follow function naming style? E.g. > > Yep, it looks good to me, and the coding-style doc mentions that "CAPITALIZED > macro names are appreciated but macros resembling functions may be named in > lower case". > > To maintain consistency, maybe apply the same lower-case style for KVM_X86_CALL()? Yeah, for sure, I should have explicitly called that out.
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h index 90cdb7256a69..eafffc2e5732 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h @@ -1853,6 +1853,7 @@ extern bool __read_mostly enable_apicv; extern struct kvm_x86_ops kvm_x86_ops; #define KVM_X86_CALL(func) static_call(kvm_x86_##func) +#define KVM_PMU_CALL(func) static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_##func) #define KVM_X86_OP(func) \ DECLARE_STATIC_CALL(kvm_x86_##func, *(((struct kvm_x86_ops *)0)->func)); diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c index 6c92bc7647b3..2ec943e3d5ba 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c @@ -542,7 +542,7 @@ int kvm_pmu_check_rdpmc_early(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int idx) if (!kvm_pmu_ops.check_rdpmc_early) return 0; - return static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_check_rdpmc_early)(vcpu, idx); + return KVM_PMU_CALL(check_rdpmc_early)(vcpu, idx); } bool is_vmware_backdoor_pmc(u32 pmc_idx) @@ -591,7 +591,7 @@ int kvm_pmu_rdpmc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned idx, u64 *data) if (is_vmware_backdoor_pmc(idx)) return kvm_pmu_rdpmc_vmware(vcpu, idx, data); - pmc = static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_rdpmc_ecx_to_pmc)(vcpu, idx, &mask); + pmc = KVM_PMU_CALL(rdpmc_ecx_to_pmc)(vcpu, idx, &mask); if (!pmc) return 1; @@ -607,7 +607,7 @@ int kvm_pmu_rdpmc(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned idx, u64 *data) void kvm_pmu_deliver_pmi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) { if (lapic_in_kernel(vcpu)) { - static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_deliver_pmi)(vcpu); + KVM_PMU_CALL(deliver_pmi)(vcpu); kvm_apic_local_deliver(vcpu->arch.apic, APIC_LVTPC); } } @@ -622,14 +622,14 @@ bool kvm_pmu_is_valid_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr) default: break; } - return static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_msr_idx_to_pmc)(vcpu, msr) || - static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_is_valid_msr)(vcpu, msr); + return KVM_PMU_CALL(msr_idx_to_pmc)(vcpu, msr) || + KVM_PMU_CALL(is_valid_msr)(vcpu, msr); } static void kvm_pmu_mark_pmc_in_use(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr) { struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu); - struct kvm_pmc *pmc = static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_msr_idx_to_pmc)(vcpu, msr); + struct kvm_pmc *pmc = KVM_PMU_CALL(msr_idx_to_pmc)(vcpu, msr); if (pmc) __set_bit(pmc->idx, pmu->pmc_in_use); @@ -654,7 +654,7 @@ int kvm_pmu_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info) msr_info->data = 0; break; default: - return static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_get_msr)(vcpu, msr_info); + return KVM_PMU_CALL(get_msr)(vcpu, msr_info); } return 0; @@ -713,7 +713,7 @@ int kvm_pmu_set_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info) break; default: kvm_pmu_mark_pmc_in_use(vcpu, msr_info->index); - return static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_set_msr)(vcpu, msr_info); + return KVM_PMU_CALL(set_msr)(vcpu, msr_info); } return 0; @@ -740,7 +740,7 @@ static void kvm_pmu_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) pmu->fixed_ctr_ctrl = pmu->global_ctrl = pmu->global_status = 0; - static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_reset)(vcpu); + KVM_PMU_CALL(reset)(vcpu); } @@ -778,7 +778,7 @@ void kvm_pmu_refresh(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) if (!vcpu->kvm->arch.enable_pmu) return; - static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_refresh)(vcpu); + KVM_PMU_CALL(refresh)(vcpu); /* * At RESET, both Intel and AMD CPUs set all enable bits for general @@ -796,7 +796,7 @@ void kvm_pmu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) struct kvm_pmu *pmu = vcpu_to_pmu(vcpu); memset(pmu, 0, sizeof(*pmu)); - static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_init)(vcpu); + KVM_PMU_CALL(init)(vcpu); kvm_pmu_refresh(vcpu); } @@ -818,7 +818,7 @@ void kvm_pmu_cleanup(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) pmc_stop_counter(pmc); } - static_call(kvm_x86_pmu_cleanup)(vcpu); + KVM_PMU_CALL(cleanup)(vcpu); bitmap_zero(pmu->pmc_in_use, X86_PMC_IDX_MAX); }
Similar to KVM_X86_CALL(), KVM_PMU_CALL() is added to streamline the usage of static calls of kvm_pmu_ops, which improves code readability. Suggested-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> Signed-off-by: Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@intel.com> --- arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 1 + arch/x86/kvm/pmu.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------ 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)