[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210624095148.437720419@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 11:41:12 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: jpoimboe@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
joro@...tes.org, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, jgross@...e.com,
x86@...nel.org, mbenes@...e.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
dvyukov@...gle.com, elver@...gle.com
Subject: [PATCH v2 13/24] x86/paravirt: Use PVOP_* for paravirt calls
Doing unconditional indirect calls through the pv_ops vector is weird.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt.h
@@ -52,11 +52,11 @@ void __init paravirt_set_cap(void);
/* The paravirtualized I/O functions */
static inline void slow_down_io(void)
{
- pv_ops.cpu.io_delay();
+ PVOP_VCALL0(cpu.io_delay);
#ifdef REALLY_SLOW_IO
- pv_ops.cpu.io_delay();
- pv_ops.cpu.io_delay();
- pv_ops.cpu.io_delay();
+ PVOP_VCALL0(cpu.io_delay);
+ PVOP_VCALL0(cpu.io_delay);
+ PVOP_VCALL0(cpu.io_delay);
#endif
}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists