[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <877c3jrrfc.ffs@tglx>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 12:52:23 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: bp@...en8.de, mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
Thomas.Lendacky@....com, nikunj@....com, Santosh.Shukla@....com,
Vasant.Hegde@....com, Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com, David.Kaplan@....com,
x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, peterz@...radead.org, seanjc@...gle.com,
pbonzini@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
huibo.wang@....com, naveen.rao@....com, francescolavra.fl@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/18] x86/apic: Add update_vector callback for
Secure AVIC
On Thu, Apr 17 2025 at 14:46, Neeraj Upadhyay wrote:
> +
> +static inline void update_vector(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int offset,
> + unsigned int vector, bool set)
> +{
> + unsigned long *reg = get_reg_bitmap(cpu, offset);
> + unsigned int bit = get_vec_bit(vector);
> +
> + if (set)
> + set_bit(bit, reg);
> + else
> + clear_bit(bit, reg);
> +}
> +static void savic_update_vector(unsigned int cpu, unsigned int vector, bool set)
> +{
> + update_vector(cpu, SAVIC_ALLOWED_IRR, vector, set);
This indirection is required because otherwise the code is too simple to
follow?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists