[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d4fcd2d8-ac84-4d9f-a47a-fecc50e18e20@lunn.ch>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2025 14:47:53 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@...hat.com>,
Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] vhost: use checked versions of VIRTIO_BIT
On Thu, Oct 09, 2025 at 07:24:16AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> This adds compile-time checked versions of VIRTIO_BIT that set bits in
> low and high qword, respectively. Will prevent confusion when people
> set bits in the wrong qword.
>
> Cc: "Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/vhost/net.c | 4 ++--
> include/linux/virtio_features.h | 9 +++++++++
> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c
> index 43d51fb1f8ea..8b98e1a8baaa 100644
> --- a/drivers/vhost/net.c
> +++ b/drivers/vhost/net.c
> @@ -76,8 +76,8 @@ static const u64 vhost_net_features[VIRTIO_FEATURES_QWORDS] = {
> (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_ACCESS_PLATFORM) |
> (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_RING_RESET) |
> (1ULL << VIRTIO_F_IN_ORDER),
> - VIRTIO_BIT(VIRTIO_NET_F_GUEST_UDP_TUNNEL_GSO) |
> - VIRTIO_BIT(VIRTIO_NET_F_HOST_UDP_TUNNEL_GSO),
> + VIRTIO_BIT_HI(VIRTIO_NET_F_GUEST_UDP_TUNNEL_GSO) |
> + VIRTIO_BIT_HI(VIRTIO_NET_F_HOST_UDP_TUNNEL_GSO),
How any bits in vhost_net_features are currently in use? How likely is
it to go from 2x 64bit words to 3x 64 bit words? Rather than _LO, _HI,
would _1ST, _2ND be better leaving it open for _3RD?
I would also be tempted to rename these macros to include _LO_ and
_HI_ in them. VIRTIO_BIT_HI(VIRTIO_LO_F_IN_ORDER) is more likely to be
spotted as wrong this way.
An alternative would be to convert to a linux bitmap, which is
arbitrary length so you just use bit number and leave the
implementation to map that to the correct offset in the underlying
data structure.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists