[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANgfPd8BNtsSwujZnk9GAfP8Xmjy7B3yHdTOnh45wbmNU_yOQw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 09:14:04 -0700
From: Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Peter Shier <pshier@...gle.com>,
Yulei Zhang <yulei.kernel@...il.com>,
Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>,
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong.eric@...il.com>,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@...el.com>,
Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] KVM: x86/mmu: Add a field to control memslot rmap allocation
On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 1:28 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 07/05/21 01:44, Ben Gardon wrote:
> >> struct kvm_vm_stat {
> >> @@ -1853,4 +1859,6 @@ static inline int kvm_cpu_get_apicid(int mps_cpu)
> >>
> >> int kvm_cpu_dirty_log_size(void);
> >>
> >> +inline bool kvm_memslots_have_rmaps(struct kvm *kvm);
> > Woops, this shouldn't be marked inline as it creates build problems
> > for the next patch with some configs.
> >
>
> Possibly stupid (or at least lazy) question: why can't it be a "normal"
> static inline function?
That was my initial approach (hence the leftover inline) but I got
some warnings about a forward declaration of struct kvm because
arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h doesn't include virt/kvm/kvm_host.h.
Maybe there's a way to fix that, but I didn't want to mess with it.
>
> Paolo
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists