From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5900BC433FE for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2022 15:49:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234028AbiCIPuC (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Mar 2022 10:50:02 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57554 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232908AbiCIPuA (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Mar 2022 10:50:00 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-x42c.google.com (mail-wr1-x42c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A36C3125596; Wed, 9 Mar 2022 07:49:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id i8so3706281wrr.8; Wed, 09 Mar 2022 07:49:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=UvDQvGGIQNW5MaHyS/mnG9zXoZoWfvzFCfxk1NpxBYw=; b=CcVPysRDYi8j3ctN8YzvtcUss+rDJ2vKmjgyTLQnNfjenE/Jlwrup2sEjWJOXA2GaV 6hvXN4difWnS/0zowY2Cdb4rImh8gMkpp5Z8ez3kus63CA8dzBCmidsDAIi6lQO52R8V h5LwyK+boyIe7k8w9efHEeqbpeIU8HTMKM3K2lb+WNAO6AkriFsCoUF6zcZUHqKbxjYs sHioM2Oj1ajNVREpqz7r0+oT6mTqoTawCzCUeOPilv6otCaKiiBZx3Zsh0VHMmK5PqwF SsKrHaIa0CALRWHJTamhMWFaZP3ysJrfiz3sb0lwPccCZ7OGkN4frFeFjdprTGdI/mn+ davA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent :subject:content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=UvDQvGGIQNW5MaHyS/mnG9zXoZoWfvzFCfxk1NpxBYw=; b=D9YYsPF+y0fom608rDRNhYEl77IBucOsLVkloLUOUaBsUR3yaOUMqZFg9HDIyiiaPu 4zExmGDWTk510QB5p1ewpW8U+awX0tecyZKqerYDjizbyGshUrhn38H1ZZK15/h/aQq4 veeVPY7S1q//M17XviUfi1Fxge7MfUMAUxJ+Wl9pyGqjDJ2B9TfPX2sCsNQ4F3Y7hVNW XkahPn9DdIzaxP5Cqaag+65sswXP5yd4GtlclhLFF6uRl5NxqwqfStl4c7PrmY87jIWY rob5v/Niq6hBohr1h52NYDwDvQ5tM/i/qvGamSJ7YrpniAddcIxGh7FkA1suXqTCjrUy 8qOQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5314ES1APcC+KR9ZD0x2mdtJzPdS0o73gQ7JHup/lgbKzTud1+NX L67P49KoaTTkGRx4n5rBxhc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyr+cM08kKU/CwDU8NZtSv7ZhRJzVPiemZJOIz4CeQxecTPaoie8n/274SyjwZN4Hd3o3ToYQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:eb81:0:b0:1e3:2bf5:132 with SMTP id t1-20020adfeb81000000b001e32bf50132mr209876wrn.246.1646840939149; Wed, 09 Mar 2022 07:48:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPV6:2001:b07:6468:f312:c8dd:75d4:99ab:290a? ([2001:b07:6468:f312:c8dd:75d4:99ab:290a]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id h12-20020a5d548c000000b001f1f99e7792sm1893101wrv.111.2022.03.09.07.48.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 09 Mar 2022 07:48:58 -0800 (PST) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <7b1999d1-4fd7-1b59-76f7-4287ad2c2a99@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 16:48:56 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] KVM: x86: SVM: use vmcb01 in avic_init_vmcb Content-Language: en-US To: Maxim Levitsky , Sean Christopherson Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Jim Mattson , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vitaly Kuznetsov , Joerg Roedel , Thomas Gleixner , Dave Hansen , Wanpeng Li , Borislav Petkov , x86@kernel.org References: <20220301135526.136554-1-mlevitsk@redhat.com> <20220301135526.136554-4-mlevitsk@redhat.com> <603d78c516d10119c833ff54367b63b7a66f32b3.camel@redhat.com> From: Paolo Bonzini In-Reply-To: <603d78c516d10119c833ff54367b63b7a66f32b3.camel@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 3/1/22 18:25, Maxim Levitsky wrote: >> I don't like this change. It's not bad code, but it'll be confusing because it >> implies that it's legal for svm->vmcb to be something other than svm->vmcb01.ptr >> when this is called. > Honestly I don't see how you had reached this conclusion. > > I just think that code that always works on vmcb01 > should use it, even if it happens that vmcb == vmcb01. > > If you insist I can drop this patch or add WARN_ON instead, > I just think that this way is cleaner. > I do like the patch, but you should do the same in init_vmcb() and svm_hv_init_vmcb() as well. Paolo