Signed-off-by: Roman Storozhenko <[email protected]>
---
virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 2 +-
virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c | 2 +-
virt/kvm/eventfd.c | 10 ++++++----
virt/kvm/irqchip.c | 7 ++++---
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 16 ++++++++--------
5 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
index a39a1e1..dbe402f 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
@@ -992,7 +992,7 @@ long kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl(struct file *filp,
case KVM_GET_REG_LIST: {
struct kvm_reg_list __user *user_list = argp;
struct kvm_reg_list reg_list;
- unsigned n;
+ unsigned int n;
if (unlikely(!kvm_vcpu_initialized(vcpu)))
return -ENOEXEC;
diff --git a/virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c b/virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c
index 571c1ce..805dfbb 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ static int coalesced_mmio_in_range(struct kvm_coalesced_mmio_dev *dev,
static int coalesced_mmio_has_room(struct kvm_coalesced_mmio_dev *dev)
{
struct kvm_coalesced_mmio_ring *ring;
- unsigned avail;
+ unsigned int avail;
/* Are we able to batch it ? */
diff --git a/virt/kvm/eventfd.c b/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
index 9120edf..0359ed7 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
@@ -184,14 +184,14 @@ int __attribute__((weak)) kvm_arch_set_irq_inatomic(
* Called with wqh->lock held and interrupts disabled
*/
static int
-irqfd_wakeup(wait_queue_entry_t *wait, unsigned mode, int sync, void *key)
+irqfd_wakeup(wait_queue_entry_t *wait, unsigned int mode, int sync, void *key)
{
struct kvm_kernel_irqfd *irqfd =
container_of(wait, struct kvm_kernel_irqfd, wait);
unsigned long flags = (unsigned long)key;
struct kvm_kernel_irq_routing_entry irq;
struct kvm *kvm = irqfd->kvm;
- unsigned seq;
+ unsigned int seq;
int idx;
if (flags & POLLIN) {
@@ -440,7 +440,8 @@ kvm_irqfd_assign(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_irqfd *args)
return ret;
}
-bool kvm_irq_has_notifier(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned irqchip, unsigned pin)
+bool kvm_irq_has_notifier(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned int irqchip,
+ unsigned int pin)
{
struct kvm_irq_ack_notifier *kian;
int gsi, idx;
@@ -471,7 +472,8 @@ void kvm_notify_acked_gsi(struct kvm *kvm, int gsi)
kian->irq_acked(kian);
}
-void kvm_notify_acked_irq(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned irqchip, unsigned pin)
+void kvm_notify_acked_irq(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned int irqchip,
+ unsigned int pin)
{
int gsi, idx;
diff --git a/virt/kvm/irqchip.c b/virt/kvm/irqchip.c
index 31e40c9..f073ecf 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/irqchip.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/irqchip.c
@@ -50,7 +50,8 @@ int kvm_irq_map_gsi(struct kvm *kvm,
return n;
}
-int kvm_irq_map_chip_pin(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned irqchip, unsigned pin)
+int kvm_irq_map_chip_pin(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned int irqchip,
+ unsigned int pin)
{
struct kvm_irq_routing_table *irq_rt;
@@ -179,8 +180,8 @@ bool __weak kvm_arch_can_set_irq_routing(struct kvm *kvm)
int kvm_set_irq_routing(struct kvm *kvm,
const struct kvm_irq_routing_entry *ue,
- unsigned nr,
- unsigned flags)
+ unsigned int nr,
+ unsigned int flags)
{
struct kvm_irq_routing_table *new, *old;
struct kvm_kernel_irq_routing_entry *e;
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index 3863cf7..0906847 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ void vcpu_put(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vcpu_put);
/* TODO: merge with kvm_arch_vcpu_should_kick */
-static bool kvm_request_needs_ipi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned req)
+static bool kvm_request_needs_ipi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int req)
{
int mode = kvm_vcpu_exiting_guest_mode(vcpu);
@@ -252,7 +252,7 @@ void kvm_reload_remote_mmus(struct kvm *kvm)
kvm_make_all_cpus_request(kvm, KVM_REQ_MMU_RELOAD);
}
-int kvm_vcpu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm *kvm, unsigned id)
+int kvm_vcpu_init(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm *kvm, unsigned int id)
{
struct page *page;
int r;
@@ -2230,7 +2230,7 @@ void kvm_vcpu_kick(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
return;
me = get_cpu();
- if (cpu != me && (unsigned)cpu < nr_cpu_ids && cpu_online(cpu))
+ if (cpu != me && (unsigned int)cpu < nr_cpu_ids && cpu_online(cpu))
if (kvm_arch_vcpu_should_kick(vcpu))
smp_send_reschedule(cpu);
put_cpu();
@@ -3766,7 +3766,7 @@ static const struct file_operations *stat_fops_per_vm[] = {
static int vm_stat_get(void *_offset, u64 *val)
{
- unsigned offset = (long)_offset;
+ unsigned int offset = (long)_offset;
struct kvm *kvm;
struct kvm_stat_data stat_tmp = {.offset = offset};
u64 tmp_val;
@@ -3784,7 +3784,7 @@ static int vm_stat_get(void *_offset, u64 *val)
static int vm_stat_clear(void *_offset, u64 val)
{
- unsigned offset = (long)_offset;
+ unsigned int offset = (long)_offset;
struct kvm *kvm;
struct kvm_stat_data stat_tmp = {.offset = offset};
@@ -3805,7 +3805,7 @@ DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE(vm_stat_fops, vm_stat_get, vm_stat_clear, "%llu\n");
static int vcpu_stat_get(void *_offset, u64 *val)
{
- unsigned offset = (long)_offset;
+ unsigned int offset = (long)_offset;
struct kvm *kvm;
struct kvm_stat_data stat_tmp = {.offset = offset};
u64 tmp_val;
@@ -3823,7 +3823,7 @@ static int vcpu_stat_get(void *_offset, u64 *val)
static int vcpu_stat_clear(void *_offset, u64 val)
{
- unsigned offset = (long)_offset;
+ unsigned int offset = (long)_offset;
struct kvm *kvm;
struct kvm_stat_data stat_tmp = {.offset = offset};
@@ -3921,7 +3921,7 @@ static void kvm_sched_out(struct preempt_notifier *pn,
kvm_arch_vcpu_put(vcpu);
}
-int kvm_init(void *opaque, unsigned vcpu_size, unsigned vcpu_align,
+int kvm_init(void *opaque, unsigned int vcpu_size, unsigned int vcpu_align,
struct module *module)
{
int r;
--
2.7.4
On 27/06/2017 11:54, Roman Storozhenko wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Roman Storozhenko <[email protected]>
> ---
> virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 2 +-
> virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c | 2 +-
> virt/kvm/eventfd.c | 10 ++++++----
> virt/kvm/irqchip.c | 7 ++++---
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> 5 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
This change is pointless. Contributors to KVM should know what
"unsigned" means.
Paolo
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 12:01:25PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 27/06/2017 11:54, Roman Storozhenko wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Roman Storozhenko <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 2 +-
> > virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c | 2 +-
> > virt/kvm/eventfd.c | 10 ++++++----
> > virt/kvm/irqchip.c | 7 ++++---
> > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> > 5 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> This change is pointless. Contributors to KVM should know what
> "unsigned" means.
Paolo, thanks that you mentioned this. But I have a question - is this just
useless or this is an error?
I saw many places in the codebase where 'unsigned int' is used. That why I
decided to make the codebase more standartized from the style point of
view.
Thanks, Roman Storozhenko.
On Tue, 2017-06-27 at 15:06 +0300, Roman Storozhenko wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 12:01:25PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 27/06/2017 11:54, Roman Storozhenko wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Roman Storozhenko <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 2 +-
> > > virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c | 2 +-
> > > virt/kvm/eventfd.c | 10 ++++++----
> > > virt/kvm/irqchip.c | 7 ++++---
> > > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> > > 5 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> >
> > This change is pointless. Contributors to KVM should know what
> > "unsigned" means.
>
> Paolo, thanks that you mentioned this. But I have a question - is this just
> useless or this is an error?
(Not Paulo and my 2c) Neither really.
> I saw many places in the codebase where 'unsigned int' is used. That why I
> decided to make the codebase more standartized from the style point of
> view.
In virt/kvm, there are 16 lines with unsigned, 160 with unsigned int
<shrug>, Both statements are correct, yes, it's kinda pointless,
and, yes, it does standardize the declarations.
It's entirely up the the maintainers (Paulo and Radim) to apply
or reject this style-only trivial patch. The compiler doesn't care.
On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 05:21:30AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-06-27 at 15:06 +0300, Roman Storozhenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 12:01:25PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > > On 27/06/2017 11:54, Roman Storozhenko wrote:
> > > > Signed-off-by: Roman Storozhenko <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > virt/kvm/arm/arm.c | 2 +-
> > > > virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c | 2 +-
> > > > virt/kvm/eventfd.c | 10 ++++++----
> > > > virt/kvm/irqchip.c | 7 ++++---
> > > > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 16 ++++++++--------
> > > > 5 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > This change is pointless. Contributors to KVM should know what
> > > "unsigned" means.
> >
> > Paolo, thanks that you mentioned this. But I have a question - is this just
> > useless or this is an error?
>
> (Not Paulo and my 2c) Neither really.
>
> > I saw many places in the codebase where 'unsigned int' is used. That why I
> > decided to make the codebase more standartized from the style point of
> > view.
>
> In virt/kvm, there are 16 lines with unsigned, 160 with unsigned int
>
> <shrug>, Both statements are correct, yes, it's kinda pointless,
> and, yes, it does standardize the declarations.
>
> It's entirely up the the maintainers (Paulo and Radim) to apply
> or reject this style-only trivial patch. The compiler doesn't care.
>
Joe, thank you for your detailed answer.
Anyway I hope that this patch will be accepted despite it is useless
from the compiler's point of view. I think that the codebase style
matters too.