Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] Drivers: hv: Introduce hv_hvcall_*() functions for hypercall arguments

[Mukesh R <mrathor@linux.microsoft.com>]

On 8/21/25 13:49, Mukesh R wrote:
> On 8/21/25 12:24, Michael Kelley wrote:
>> From: Mukesh R <mrathor@linux.microsoft.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 7:58 PM
>>>
>>> On 8/20/25 17:31, Mukesh R wrote:
>>>> On 4/15/25 11:07, mhkelley58@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> From: Michael Kelley <mhklinux@outlook.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>
> <snip>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IMHO, this is unnecessary change that just obfuscates code. With status quo
>>>> one has the advantage of seeing what exactly is going on, one can use the
>>>> args any which way, change batch size any which way, and is thus flexible.
>>
>> I started this patch set in response to some errors in open coding the
>> use of hyperv_pcpu_input/output_arg, to see if helper functions could
>> regularize the usage and reduce the likelihood of future errors. Balancing
>> the pluses and minuses of the result, in my view the helper functions are
>> an improvement, though not overwhelmingly so. Others may see the
>> tradeoffs differently, and as such I would not go to the mat in arguing the
>> patches must be taken. But if we don't take them, we need to go back and
>> clean up minor errors and inconsistencies in the open coding at some
>> existing hypercall call sites.
> 
> Yes, definitely. Assuming Nuno knows what issues you are referring to,
> I'll work with him to get them addressed asap. Thanks for noticing them.
> If Nuno is not aware, I'll ping you for more info.

Talked to Nuno, he's not aware of anything pending or details. So if you
can kindly list them out here, I will make sure it gets addressed right
away.

Thanks,
-Mukesh


>>
<deleted>
>>