Received: by 2002:ac0:a581:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m1-v6csp1205611imm; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 12:10:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKI9u4RWDxMtaVkF0+jFxQe6G9Q4j07fqH5f+e3Ae8mzuPhcqZChGf8TQ4g7nKApSvAJsOZH X-Received: by 2002:a62:154a:: with SMTP id 71-v6mr3098306pfv.170.1529694627260; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 12:10:27 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1529694627; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=07tHjB02v0D6EOmvUJIzGhsquHmsgjnre3RqQDIMHTl/iWRhcoDBUxr0pib0CT7boU GltbDveT1LPR9MnLezSpVxE9R/u0BNxR3aGPl+JwNmrIzgEtFIvky3nWNPjNolHjN3nx Qt1D1pDpTfpsCQJj9YzXpGfOUwvG/ddfGDI5/ZpKAYFnvmk+k6lNE61Bm91JiPRwOs/8 4X/gDSsXI9MNc4/gTI9v7LtcbRPfRCuBc7R0b8QRXha77ezAHUtG0tn3gxgUO4uMydrJ BPk8U27GvfrqxadsBRHxf1eNQVKiW7CK3yYPzZs+/vUKGcC81fd+PZ+XDXNpo8ER4qth tG8w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :arc-authentication-results; bh=RGhDiwcg5Hh0d2thO4sMxdWBI0FR33k19x1ecFp13G4=; b=zDDQpKkClDOdeGfqyEmctZlhlis5bJ4CTSxcEVx8dTCxkRRej2L0mSTYDet1DDCs7C 2DyX+BYyohntZ45zi4gM9Ga72Pi3ciFW+rh/kgLikJL07rzOg/Zif6gX96Av5Fuog7Y7 9TxhMWItwRrkOA/275m7ul/4wENYANU98i1+h9JHpOc0fDW+z2aBleDM7DlkmcUn0FsD UzMxLcPPHcaTfpOmbRfUAFYcA7EuUKfVt+ant+xHFbwVWq1ed8DIY5zfbm2e9LHl5tOx yHcLzGIMcWkT/DpL/9N56NYB/1dTE44KJtJ9nazgCFq6aXS9jyEVMysD2YNJ3LYTxlPP adtQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e12-v6si6562774pgt.243.2018.06.22.12.10.12; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 12:10:27 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934348AbeFVTJQ (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 22 Jun 2018 15:09:16 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:33122 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752652AbeFVTJP (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jun 2018 15:09:15 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: Nedap ESD1 at mail.skyhub.de Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (blast.alien8.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id tUIZbLNJPq2v; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 21:09:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from zn.tnic (p200300EC2BCF3400329C23FFFEA6A903.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2bcf:3400:329c:23ff:fea6:a903]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id CA9A11EC020C; Fri, 22 Jun 2018 21:09:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 21:09:12 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= Cc: KVM , Joerg Roedel , Tom Lendacky , Tony Luck , Yazen Ghannam , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86/kvm: Implement MSR_HWCR support Message-ID: <20180622190912.GG1882@zn.tnic> References: <20180622095101.32587-1-bp@alien8.de> <20180622095101.32587-3-bp@alien8.de> <20180622185237.GC5549@flask> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20180622185237.GC5549@flask> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 08:52:38PM +0200, Radim Krčmář wrote: > msr_info->host_initiated is always going to return true, so it would be > better to put it outside of __set_mci_status. > > Maybe we could just write the whole logic inline, otherwise I'd call it > something like mci_status_is_writeable. > > > static int set_msr_mce(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info) > > { > > u64 mcg_cap = vcpu->arch.mcg_cap; > > @@ -2176,9 +2200,13 @@ static int set_msr_mce(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct msr_data *msr_info) > > if ((offset & 0x3) == 0 && > > data != 0 && (data | (1 << 10)) != ~(u64)0) > > return -1; > > - if (!msr_info->host_initiated && > > - (offset & 0x3) == 1 && data != 0) > > - return -1; > > + > > + /* MCi_STATUS */ > > + if ((offset & 0x3) == 1) { > > + if (!__set_mci_status(vcpu, msr_info)) > > + return -1; > > + } > > if (!msr_info->host_initiated && > (offset & 0x3) == 1 && data != 0) { > struct msr_data tmp = {.index = MSR_K7_HWCR}; > > if (!guest_cpuid_is_amd(vcpu) || > !kvm_x86_ops->get_msr(vcpu, &tmp) || > !(tmp.data & BIT_ULL(18))) > return -1; Don't you feel it is cleaner if all the MCi_STATUS checking is done in a separate function? The indentation level and the bunch of checks in set_msr_mce() make it hard to read while having a separate function separates it and makes it easier to follow. I mean, you're the maintainer but if I may give a suggestion, moving the whole logic into a separate function would be more readable. And then do: if (!msr_info->host_initiated) { if (check_mci_status(...)) return -1; } Something like that... -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.