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:   Tue, 17 Jan 2023 13:22:41 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa@csail.mit.edu>
Cc:     Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        x86@kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Alexey Makhalov <amakhalov@vmware.com>,
        VMware PV-Drivers Reviewers <pv-drivers@vmware.com>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
        xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/paravirt: merge activate_mm and dup_mmap callbacks
Message-ID: <Y8aTEfpw0Vm6g0hC@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20230112152132.4399-1-jgross@suse.com>
 <3fcb5078-852e-0886-c084-7fb0cfa5b757@csail.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3fcb5078-852e-0886-c084-7fb0cfa5b757@csail.mit.edu>
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Jan 15, 2023 at 08:27:50PM -0800, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:

> I see that's not an issue right now since there is no other actual
> user for these callbacks. But are we sure that merging the callbacks
> just because the current user (Xen PV) has the same implementation for
> both is a good idea?

IIRC the pv_ops are part of the PARAVIRT_ME_HARDER (also spelled as
_XXL) suite of ops and they are only to be used by Xen PV, no new users
of these must happen.

The moment we can drop Xen PV (hopes and dreams etc..) all these things
go in the bin right along with it.