[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <X+Dp0kd19twjM0wj@google.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 10:30:42 -0800
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>,
Richard Herbert <rherbert@...patico.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Get root level from walkers when
retrieving MMIO SPTE
On Mon, Dec 21, 2020, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 18/12/20 10:10, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> > > - int root = vcpu->arch.mmu->shadow_root_level;
> > > - int leaf;
> > > - int level;
> > > + int root, leaf, level;
> > > bool reserved = false;
> > Personal taste: I would've renamed 'root' to 'root_level' (to be
> > consistent with get_walk()/kvm_tdp_mmu_get_walk()) and 'level' to
> > e.g. 'l' as it's only being used as an interator ('i' would also do).
>
> Maybe agree on the former, not really on the latter. :)
Same here. I kept 'root' to reduce code churn, even though I'd probably have
used 'root_level' if I were writing from scratch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists