[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SN4PR2101MB088036B8892891C5408067BEC0689@SN4PR2101MB0880.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 21:20:49 +0000
From: Sunil Muthuswamy <sunilmut@...rosoft.com>
To: Michael Kelley <mikelley@...rosoft.com>,
Matheus Castello <matheus@...tello.eng.br>,
"linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
Wei Liu <liuwe@...rosoft.com>,
Tianyu Lan <Tianyu.Lan@...rosoft.com>,
Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>, vkuznets <vkuznets@...hat.com>
CC: KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4] x86/Hyper-V: Support for free page reporting
> What's the strategy for this flag in the unlikely event that the hypercall fails?
> It doesn't seem right to have hv_query_ext_cap() fail, but leave the
> static flag set to true. Just move that line down to after the status check
> has succeeded?
That call should not fail in any normal circumstances. The current idea was to
avoid repeating the same call on persistent failure. But, since we don't expect
the query capability to be called in any kind of hot path, I am ok moving this
down.
>
> Other than the above about the flag when the hypercall fails,
> everything else looks good.
Thanks for the review.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists