[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YB3X753GYXQMXYfY@google.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 15:42:39 -0800
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, Peter Shier <pshier@...gle.com>,
Peter Feiner <pfeiner@...gle.com>,
Junaid Shahid <junaids@...gle.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Yulei Zhang <yulei.kernel@...il.com>,
Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong.eric@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 13/28] KVM: x86/mmu: Ensure forward progress when
yielding in TDP MMU iter
On Tue, Feb 02, 2021, Ben Gardon wrote:
> @@ -505,8 +516,8 @@ static bool zap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *root,
>
> tdp_mmu_set_spte(kvm, &iter, 0);
>
> - flush_needed = !can_yield ||
> - !tdp_mmu_iter_cond_resched(kvm, &iter, true);
> + flush_needed = !(can_yield &&
> + tdp_mmu_iter_cond_resched(kvm, &iter, true));
Unnecessary change to convert perfectly readable code into an abomination :-D
No need to "fix", it goes aways in the next patch anyways, I just wanted to
complain.
> }
> return flush_needed;
> }
> --
> 2.30.0.365.g02bc693789-goog
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists