[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d0a37147-ff96-44b3-bee4-7004f0af5199@suse.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2023 18:17:16 +0200
From: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: pbonzini@...hat.com, x86@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: User mutex guards to eliminate
__kvm_x86_vendor_init()
On 30.10.23 г. 18:07 ч., Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>> Current separation between (__){0,1}kvm_x86_vendor_init() is superfluos as
>
> superfluous
>
> But this intro is actively misleading. The double-underscore variant most definitely
> isn't superfluous, e.g. it eliminates the need for gotos reduces the probability
> of incorrect error codes, bugs in the error handling, etc. It _becomes_ superflous
> after switching to guard(mutex).
>
> IMO, this is one of the instances where the "problem, then solution" appoach is
> counter-productive. If there are no objections, I'll massage the change log to
> the below when applying (for 6.8, in a few weeks).
>
> Use the recently introduced guard(mutex) infrastructure acquire and
> automatically release vendor_module_lock when the guard goes out of scope.
> Drop the inner __kvm_x86_vendor_init(), its sole purpose was to simplify
> releasing vendor_module_lock in error paths.
>
> No functional change intended.
Thanks, I'm fine with this changelog.
>
>> the the underscore version doesn't have any other callers.
>>
>> Instead, use the newly added cleanup infrastructure to ensure that
>> kvm_x86_vendor_init() holds the vendor_module_lock throughout its
>> exectuion and that in case of error in the middle it's released. No
>> functional changes.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists