On 01/10/2018 18:20, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> writes:
> 
>> On 27/09/2018 13:07, Roman Kagan wrote:
> ...
>>>
>>> I must say that now it looks even more tempting to follow the same
>>> pattern as your kvm_hv_flush_tlb: define a function that would call
>>> kvm_apic_set_irq() on all vcpus in a mask (optimizing the all-set case
>>> with a NULL mask), and make kvm_hv_send_ipi perform the same hv_vp_set
>>> -> vcpu_mask transformation followed by calling into that function.
>>
>>
>> It would perhaps be cleaner, but really kvm_apic_set_irq is as efficient
>> as it can be, since it takes the destination vcpu directly.
>>
>> The code duplication for walking the sparse set is a bit ugly, perhaps
>> that could be changed to use an iterator macro.
> 
> I actually like Roman's suggestion on how to re-write kvm_hv_flush_tlb()
> and I also agree that it would be easier for future readers if we write
> kvm_hv_send_ipi() in a similar way. Actually, I already have v7 in my
> stash, will be sending it out shortly.

Just send follow ups now, please.  I already have enough long queue. :)

Paolo

Reply via email to