[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200519151242.GA13603@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 08:12:42 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Like Xu <like.xu@...ux.intel.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, ak@...ux.intel.com,
wei.w.wang@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 07/11] KVM: x86: Expose MSR_IA32_PERF_CAPABILITIES
for LBR record format
On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 12:53:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 04:30:50PM +0800, Like Xu wrote:
> > @@ -203,6 +206,12 @@ static int intel_pmu_get_msr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info)
> > case MSR_CORE_PERF_GLOBAL_OVF_CTRL:
> > msr_info->data = pmu->global_ovf_ctrl;
> > return 0;
> > + case MSR_IA32_PERF_CAPABILITIES:
> > + if (!msr_info->host_initiated &&
> > + !guest_cpuid_has(vcpu, X86_FEATURE_PDCM))
> > + return 1;
>
> I know this is KVM code, so maybe they feel differently, but I find the
> above indentation massively confusing. Consider using: "set cino=:0(0"
> if you're a vim user.
I most definitely don't feel differently. I would be strongly in favor of
making that pattern a checkpatch error.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists