[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YieVPL2rwAQGB+cj@google.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2022 17:41:16 +0000
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
dmatlack@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/25] KVM: x86/mmu: do not recompute root level from
kvm_mmu_role_regs
On Mon, Feb 21, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> The root_level can be found in the cpu_mode (in fact the field
> is superfluous and could be removed, but one thing at a time).
> Since there is only one usage left of role_regs_to_root_level,
> inline it into kvm_calc_cpu_mode.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 23 ++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> index 1af898f0cf87..6e539fc2c9c7 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> @@ -244,19 +244,6 @@ static struct kvm_mmu_role_regs vcpu_to_role_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> return regs;
> }
>
> -static int role_regs_to_root_level(const struct kvm_mmu_role_regs *regs)
> -{
> - if (!____is_cr0_pg(regs))
> - return 0;
> - else if (____is_efer_lma(regs))
> - return ____is_cr4_la57(regs) ? PT64_ROOT_5LEVEL :
> - PT64_ROOT_4LEVEL;
> - else if (____is_cr4_pae(regs))
> - return PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL;
> - else
> - return PT32_ROOT_LEVEL;
> -}
> -
> static inline bool kvm_available_flush_tlb_with_range(void)
> {
> return kvm_x86_ops.tlb_remote_flush_with_range;
> @@ -4695,7 +4682,13 @@ kvm_calc_cpu_mode(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, const struct kvm_mmu_role_regs *regs)
> role.base.smep_andnot_wp = ____is_cr4_smep(regs) && !____is_cr0_wp(regs);
> role.base.smap_andnot_wp = ____is_cr4_smap(regs) && !____is_cr0_wp(regs);
> role.base.has_4_byte_gpte = !____is_cr4_pae(regs);
> - role.base.level = role_regs_to_root_level(regs);
> +
> + if (____is_efer_lma(regs))
> + role.base.level = ____is_cr4_la57(regs) ? PT64_ROOT_5LEVEL : PT64_ROOT_4LEVEL;
Can we wrap this, even if indentation is reduced? I find it much easier to quickly
understand the if-else paths if they're stacked and not run out to almost 100 chars.
if (____is_efer_lma(regs))
role.base.level = ____is_cr4_la57(regs) ? PT64_ROOT_5LEVEL :
PT64_ROOT_4LEVEL;
else if (____is_cr4_pae(regs))
role.base.level = PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL;
else
role.base.level = PT32_ROOT_LEVEL;
> + else if (____is_cr4_pae(regs))
> + role.base.level = PT32E_ROOT_LEVEL;
> + else
> + role.base.level = PT32_ROOT_LEVEL;
>
> role.ext.cr0_pg = 1;
> role.ext.cr4_pae = ____is_cr4_pae(regs);
> @@ -4790,7 +4783,7 @@ static void init_kvm_tdp_mmu(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> context->get_guest_pgd = kvm_get_guest_cr3;
> context->get_pdptr = kvm_pdptr_read;
> context->inject_page_fault = kvm_inject_page_fault;
> - context->root_level = role_regs_to_root_level(regs);
> + context->root_level = cpu_mode.base.level;
>
> if (!is_cr0_pg(context))
> context->gva_to_gpa = nonpaging_gva_to_gpa;
> --
> 2.31.1
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists