Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] KVM: selftests: Take vcpu pointer instead of id in
 vm_vcpu_rm()
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Wainer dos Santos Moschetta <wainersm@redhat.com>
Cc:     Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
        Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Jones <drjones@redhat.com>
References: <20200410231707.7128-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
 <20200410231707.7128-2-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
 <b696c5b9-2507-8849-e196-37c83806cfdf@redhat.com>
 <20200413212659.GB21204@linux.intel.com>
From:   Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <d2def9fa-375e-d677-32a2-b1bb0e8d3fb6@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Apr 2020 17:11:18 +0200
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: <20200413212659.GB21204@linux.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 13/04/20 23:26, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> FWIW, I think the whole vcpuid thing is a bad interface, almost all the
> tests end up defining an arbitrary number for the sole VCPU_ID, i.e. the
> vcpuid interface just adds a pointless layer of obfuscation.  I haven't
> looked through all the tests, but returning the vcpu and making the struct
> opaque, same as kvm_vm, seems like it would yield more readable code with
> less overhead.

Yes, I agree.  This was in the original Google submission, I didn't like
it either but I didn't feel like changing it and I wouldn't mind if
someone does the work...

Paolo