Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 14 Sep 2022 07:48:15 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To:     Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Cc:     kvm@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Michael Kelley <mikelley@microsoft.com>,
        Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>,
        linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] KVM: x86: Hyper-V invariant TSC control
Message-ID: <YyGHP1K9cRvQ9COE@google.com>
References: <20220831085009.1627523-1-vkuznets@redhat.com>
 <20220831085009.1627523-2-vkuznets@redhat.com>
 <Yx85fuFWR/X097SL@google.com>
 <877d27r48z.fsf@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <877d27r48z.fsf@redhat.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 13, 2022, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2022, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> >>  
> >> +/*
> >> + * With HV_ACCESS_TSC_INVARIANT feature, invariant TSC (CPUID.80000007H:EDX[8])
> >> + * is only observed after HV_X64_MSR_TSC_INVARIANT_CONTROL was written to.
> >> + */
> >> +static inline bool kvm_hv_invtsc_filtered(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >
> > Can this be more strongly worded, e.g. maybe kvm_hv_is_invtsc_disabled()?  "Filtered"
> > doesn't strictly mean disabled and makes it sound like there's something else that
> > needs to act on the "filtering"
> >
> 
> "Hidden"? :-) I'm OK with kvm_hv_is_invtsc_disabled() too.

Hidden works for me.  Or suppressed, inihbited, whatever.  Just not filtered :-)