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;
Date:   Wed, 2 Jun 2021 10:43:40 +0000
From:   Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To:     Yanan Wang <wangyanan55@huawei.com>
Cc:     Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
        kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Julien Thierry <julien.thierry.kdev@gmail.com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
        Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>, wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com,
        zhukeqian1@huawei.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] KVM: arm64: Introduce KVM_PGTABLE_S2_GUEST
 stage-2 flag
Message-ID: <YLdg3K6m0P+cis2P@google.com>
References: <20210415115032.35760-1-wangyanan55@huawei.com>
 <20210415115032.35760-2-wangyanan55@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210415115032.35760-2-wangyanan55@huawei.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Yanan,

On Thursday 15 Apr 2021 at 19:50:27 (+0800), Yanan Wang wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> index c3674c47d48c..a43cbe697b37 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h
> @@ -61,10 +61,12 @@ struct kvm_pgtable_mm_ops {
>   * @KVM_PGTABLE_S2_NOFWB:	Don't enforce Normal-WB even if the CPUs have
>   *				ARM64_HAS_STAGE2_FWB.
>   * @KVM_PGTABLE_S2_IDMAP:	Only use identity mappings.
> + * @KVM_PGTABLE_S2_GUEST:	Whether the page-tables are guest stage-2.
>   */
>  enum kvm_pgtable_stage2_flags {
>  	KVM_PGTABLE_S2_NOFWB			= BIT(0),
>  	KVM_PGTABLE_S2_IDMAP			= BIT(1),
> +	KVM_PGTABLE_S2_GUEST			= BIT(2),

Assuming that we need this flag (maybe not given Marc's suggestion on
another patch), I'd recommend re-naming it to explain _what_ it does,
rather than _who_ is using it.

That's the principle we followed for e.g. KVM_PGTABLE_S2_IDMAP, so we
should be consistent here as well.

Thanks,
Quentin