[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <931ebe53-48c8-669d-72a6-9bd8da78b095@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 16:16:02 +0800
From: Like Xu <like.xu@...ux.intel.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Cc: rkrcmar@...hat.com, sean.j.christopherson@...el.com,
vkuznets@...hat.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
ak@...ux.intel.com, wei.w.wang@...el.com, kan.liang@...el.com,
like.xu@...el.com, ehankland@...gle.com, arbel.moshe@...cle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] KVM: x86/vPMU: Reuse perf_event to avoid
unnecessary pmc_reprogram_counter
Hi Paolo,
On 2019/10/21 16:12, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Just a naming tweak:
>
> On 13/10/19 11:15, Like Xu wrote:
>> + /* the exact requested config to create perf_event */
>> + u64 programed_config;
>
> /*
> * eventsel value for general purpose counters, ctrl value for
> * fixed counters.
> */
> u64 current_config;
>
>
It looks good to me and I'll apply this.
Is there more need for improvement?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists