Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1759332AbbLBTBH (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 2 Dec 2015 14:01:07 -0500
Received: from smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com ([208.91.2.12]:32801 "EHLO
	smtp-outbound-1.vmware.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755481AbbLBTBD (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 2 Dec 2015 14:01:03 -0500
From: "Sinclair Yeh" <syeh@vmware.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 11:02:23 -0800
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        "pv-drivers@vmware.com" <pv-drivers@vmware.com>,
        "linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com" 
	<linux-graphics-maintainer@vmware.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        "linux-input@vger.kernel.org" <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] Input: Update vmmouse.c to use the common VMW_PORT
 macros
Message-ID: <20151202190223.GD14231@syeh-linux>
References: <1449008332-9394-3-git-send-email-syeh@vmware.com>
 <20151201222414.GH3740@dtor-ws>
 <20151201223255.GA10753@syeh-linux>
 <CAKdAkRTVJ_DWD6uYhp+qd1uYwe3rPguDFAMXpa5=8CwVuO16NQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20151201225420.GA11210@syeh-linux>
 <20151202000408.GB5363@kroah.com>
 <20151202022106.GA6471@syeh-linux>
 <20151202153124.GC29557@kroah.com>
 <20151202172634.GA15531@dtor-ws>
 <20151202184528.GA23182@kroah.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20151202184528.GA23182@kroah.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 5612
Lines: 110

On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 10:45:28AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 09:26:34AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 07:31:24AM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 06:21:06PM -0800, Sinclair Yeh wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 04:04:08PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:54:20PM -0800, Sinclair Yeh wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:45:27PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Sinclair Yeh <syeh@vmware.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > <snip>
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > >> >   */
> > > > > > > >> > -#define VMMOUSE_CMD(cmd, in1, out1, out2, out3, out4)      \
> > > > > > > >> > -({                                                 \
> > > > > > > >> > -   unsigned long __dummy1, __dummy2;               \
> > > > > > > >> > -   __asm__ __volatile__ ("inl %%dx" :              \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "=a"(out1),                             \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "=b"(out2),                             \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "=c"(out3),                             \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "=d"(out4),                             \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "=S"(__dummy1),                         \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "=D"(__dummy2) :                        \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "a"(VMMOUSE_PROTO_MAGIC),               \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "b"(in1),                               \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "c"(VMMOUSE_PROTO_CMD_##cmd),           \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "d"(VMMOUSE_PROTO_PORT) :               \
> > > > > > > >> > -           "memory");                              \
> > > > > > > >> > +#define VMMOUSE_CMD(cmd, in1, out1, out2, out3, out4)                 \
> > > > > > > >> > +({                                                            \
> > > > > > > >> > +   unsigned long __dummy1 = 0, __dummy2 = 0;                  \
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Why do we need to initialize dummies?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Because for some commands those parameters to VMW_PORT() can be both
> > > > > > > > input and outout.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The vmmouse commands do not use them as input though, so it seems we
> > > > > > > are simply wasting CPU cycles setting them to 0 just because we are
> > > > > > > using the new VMW_PORT here. Why do we need to switch? What is the
> > > > > > > benefit of doing this?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > There are two reasons.  One is to make the code more readable and
> > > > > > maintainable.  Rather than having mostly similar inline assembly
> > > > > > code sprinkled across multiple modules, we can just use the macros
> > > > > > and document that.
> > > > > 
> > > > > But the macro is only used here, and the variables aren't used at all,
> > > > > so it makes no sense in this file.
> > > > 
> > > > Maybe it's because I didn't CC you on the rest of the series.  I wasn't
> > > > sure what the proper distribution list is for each part.
> > > 
> > > Use scripts/get_maintainer.pl, that's what it is there for.  A number of
> > > those patches should go through me, if not all of them, if you want them
> > > merged...
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > This new macro is also used in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/vmware.c and
> > > > vmw_balloon.c
> > > 
> > > And it's used inconsistantly in those patches (you don't set the dummy
> > > variables to 0 in all of them...)  Now maybe that's just how the asm
> > > functions work, but it's not very obvious as to why this is at all.
> > > 
> > > > > > The second reason is this organization makes some on-going future
> > > > > > development easier.
> > > > > 
> > > > > We don't plan for "future" development other than a single patch series,
> > > > > as we have no idea what that development is, nor if it will really
> > > > > happen.  You can always change this file later if you need to, nothing
> > > > > is keeping that from happening.
> > > > 
> > > > So the intent of this series is to centralize similar lines of inline
> > > > assembly code that are currently used by 3 different kernel modules
> > > > to a central place.  The new vmware.h [patch 0/6] becomes the one header
> > > > to include for common guest-host communication needs.
> > > 
> > > Why can't it go into vmw_vmci_defs.h instead, or your other .h file, why
> > > create yet-another-.h-file for your bus?  You already have 2, this would
> > > make it 3, which seems like a lot...
> > 
> > Umm, you are not saying that vmmouse should include vmci header file(s),
> > are you? Because the 2 are unrelated and vmci does not use the
> > hypervisor port to communicate with host IIRC.
> 
> vmmouse should include some type of "vmware bus" .h file, if it's not
> the vmw_* files, what are they for?  My point being, I didn't see the
> need to add another .h file when we should probably already have one for
> this bus, right?

I had a brief chat with Thomas on this, and he added to Dmitry's reply
earlier.

The two existing *.h files are for the VMCI driver, and the new macros
are used by the platform code and also other drivers like vmw_balloon and
vmmouse.

It makes more sense to create a new vmware.h file in arch/x86/include/asm

Sinclair

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/