Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61E4AC05027 for ; Fri, 10 Feb 2023 01:13:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231187AbjBJBNh (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Feb 2023 20:13:37 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56092 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229483AbjBJBNf (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Feb 2023 20:13:35 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-x62d.google.com (mail-pl1-x62d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 55CCC5EA07 for ; Thu, 9 Feb 2023 17:13:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pl1-x62d.google.com with SMTP id m2so4914052plg.4 for ; Thu, 09 Feb 2023 17:13:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=k3av9jkUvE9A6NJ/myH2LVzHPBwDhgbAq+TXm0rIoTM=; b=PHZQYT5oASeECsZsHRHQMGmmlRn/fh1qFIyHRbeqb6UKHavmxO4hmYGKVNZ3HXfHCP OC+jObRKncg1lbUI1c6zLMxOulEL4CDQTfhrHtjSFhe60xMZzvHSZKHiz04WTd812P6c /gmzgZGkx8I5YMNuPo9O28D4S2q+ikgRILRReal9hzuIijl6Zu4RVW6sHImTFlsiNrI3 YVkJmEkMBeHhPbqmrRnCQuyvV8054XIVeM+4KGPkRjrFvaIx64M0S/WFnVQwX9NNiWbF hMWRMMEk9Iz3eHX6+Tp6StYtSqPySt+Z95pXifmRZBUzvX8dri+GKO8RUx9Sfcd1JPKs b1Mw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=k3av9jkUvE9A6NJ/myH2LVzHPBwDhgbAq+TXm0rIoTM=; b=dndNRt7w0prAX/8qzNVcnQC6GqMb4OSPKUGFgh1erdO/5kE7Ag575NdvVSfY6znPSe uOE7Et7ktmJVLzQba3G/bc+ZqDTFBraQMwSPJBID069a9yeOfv6oInfXBvJcqvjaKy7o l5Po8EilfJ36pdqbZH3gnNzt7scul5OlavIdQM/rwhQWQTkPUW+qutFKSg7p/dBrgFvc vdaDyXTaUHpYGxhzb8nWY+knD+prFjdP9zgcf3r6IHU8GfVSo2VV1gE8y0H0MCo92MW6 sPiD03K6IgXut396EbR7bVegLMvB0/T1qz2fWQlRc0V3dgMLtpopXaKCka1Zy/VXa1LY XcUA== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXJeB9XFX31j+zOOa/Z1/xmOduwEC0i6/vrXLeAzuglI8mWO3c6 zF4jyFgp5+hmfkJwnm50cMfY401QHugk/tjH44g= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set9pFw3J5w5r/xV/SoTgrT6GjoR14zs1JLwGP7oCVVKObwM+RL2W/uCJ6aaf3zqmyu8HS/ZqXg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ed89:b0:198:af50:e4e4 with SMTP id e9-20020a170902ed8900b00198af50e4e4mr102079plj.10.1675991613691; Thu, 09 Feb 2023 17:13:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com (7.104.168.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.168.104.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i25-20020aa78b59000000b0059428b51220sm2040561pfd.186.2023.02.09.17.13.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 09 Feb 2023 17:13:32 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2023 01:13:27 +0000 From: Sean Christopherson To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov , Tom Rix , kvm@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nathan Chancellor , Nick Desaulniers Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: VMX: Stub out enable_evmcs static key for CONFIG_HYPERV=n Message-ID: References: <20230208205430.1424667-1-seanjc@google.com> <20230208205430.1424667-3-seanjc@google.com> <87mt5n6kx6.fsf@redhat.com> <1433ea0c-5072-b9d9-a533-401bb58f9a80@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1433ea0c-5072-b9d9-a533-401bb58f9a80@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 09, 2023, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 2/9/23 14:13, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote: > > > +static __always_inline bool is_evmcs_enabled(void) > > > +{ > > > + return static_branch_unlikely(&enable_evmcs); > > > +} > > I have a suggestion. While 'is_evmcs_enabled' name is certainly not > > worse than 'enable_evmcs', it may still be confusing as it's not clear > > which eVMCS is meant: are we running a guest using eVMCS or using eVMCS > > ourselves? So what if we rename this to a very explicit 'is_kvm_on_hyperv()' > > and hide the implementation details (i.e. 'evmcs') inside? > > I prefer keeping eVMCS in the name, +1, IIUC KVM can run on Hyper-V without eVMCS being enabled. > but I agree a better name could be something like kvm_uses_evmcs()? kvm_is_using_evmcs()?