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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/9] KVM: x86: Move init-only kvm_x86_ops to separate
 struct
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc:     Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
        Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
        linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20200321202603.19355-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
 <20200321202603.19355-3-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
 <87lfnr9sqn.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
 <20200323152909.GE28711@linux.intel.com>
 <87o8sn82ef.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <30b847cf-98db-145f-8aa0-a847146d5649@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Mar 2020 20:47:04 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87o8sn82ef.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 23/03/20 17:24, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Sounds cool! (not sure that with only two implementations people won't
> call it 'over-engineered' but cool). 

Yes, something like

#define KVM_X86_OP(name) .name = vmx_##name

(svm_##name for svm.c) and then

	KVM_X86_OP(check_nested_events)

etc.

> My personal wish would just be that
> function names in function implementations are not auto-generated so
> e.g. a simple 'git grep vmx_hardware_setup' works

Yes, absolutely; the function names would still be written by hand.

Paolo

> but the way how we
> fill vmx_x86_ops in can be macroed I guess.