Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
Message-ID: <b028a431-92e0-4440-adf9-6b855edb88c0@suse.com>
Date:   Sat, 9 Dec 2023 13:57:23 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: User mutex guards to eliminate
 __kvm_x86_vendor_init()
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     pbonzini@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20231030141728.1406118-1-nik.borisov@suse.com>
 <ZT_UtjWSKCwgBxb_@google.com>
From:   Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@suse.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZT_UtjWSKCwgBxb_@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 30.10.23 г. 18:07 ч., Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2023, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>> Current separation between (__){0,1}kvm_x86_vendor_init() is 
>> superfluos as
> 
> superfluous
> 
> But this intro is actively misleading.  The double-underscore variant 
> most definitely
> isn't superfluous, e.g. it eliminates the need for gotos reduces the 
> probability
> of incorrect error codes, bugs in the error handling, etc.  It _becomes_ 
> superflous
> after switching to guard(mutex).
> 
> IMO, this is one of the instances where the "problem, then solution" 
> appoach is
> counter-productive.  If there are no objections, I'll massage the change 
> log to
> the below when applying (for 6.8, in a few weeks).
> 
>   Use the recently introduced guard(mutex) infrastructure acquire and
>   automatically release vendor_module_lock when the guard goes out of 
> scope.
>   Drop the inner __kvm_x86_vendor_init(), its sole purpose was to simplify
>   releasing vendor_module_lock in error paths.
> 
>   No functional change intended.
> 
>> the the underscore version doesn't have any other callers.
>>


Has this fallen through the cracks as I don't see it in 6.7?