On 03/12/15 11:08, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> Hello!
>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
>>> b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c index 87a64e8..a667228 100644 ---
>>> a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c @@
>>> -102,7 +102,7 @@ static bool access_vm_reg(struct kvm_vcpu
>>> *vcpu,
>>>
>>> BUG_ON(!p->is_write);
>>>
>>> - val = *vcpu_reg(vcpu, p->Rt); + val = *p->val;
>>
>> Why does it have to be a pointer? You could just have "val =
>> p->val" if you carried the actual value instead of a pointer to the
>> stack variable holding that value.
>
> There's only one concern for pointer approach. Actually, this
> refactor is based on my vGICv3 live migration API patch set:
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg124205.html
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg124202.html
>
> It's simply more convenient to use a pointer for exchange with
> userspace, see vgic_v3_cpu_regs_access() and callers. I wouldn't like
> to refactor the code again. What's your opinion on this?
I still don't think this is a good idea. You can still store the value
as an integer in vgic_v3_cpu_regs_access(), and check the write property
to do the writeback on read. Which is the same thing I asked for in this
patch.
> And of course i'll fix up the rest.
Thanks,
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
