[PATCH 25/44] KVM: s390: Do s390 specific init without bouncing through kvm_init()
Claudio Imbrenda
imbrenda at linux.ibm.com
Thu Nov 3 06:21:17 PDT 2022
On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 13:44:15 +0100
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda at linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 23:18:52 +0000
> Sean Christopherson <seanjc at google.com> wrote:
>
> > Move the guts of kvm_arch_init() into a new helper, __kvm_s390_init(),
> > and invoke the new helper directly from kvm_s390_init() instead of
> > bouncing through kvm_init(). Invoking kvm_arch_init() is the very
> > first action performed by kvm_init(), i.e. this is a glorified nop.
> >
> > Moving setup to __kvm_s390_init() will allow tagging more functions as
> > __init, and emptying kvm_arch_init() will allow dropping the hook
> > entirely once all architecture implementations are nops.
> >
> > No functional change intended.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc at google.com>
> > ---
> > arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> > index 7fcd2d3b3558..e1c9980aae78 100644
> > --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> > +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> > @@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ static void kvm_s390_cpu_feat_init(void)
> > */
> > }
> >
> > -int kvm_arch_init(void *opaque)
> > +static int __kvm_s390_init(void)
> > {
> > int rc = -ENOMEM;
> >
> > @@ -519,7 +519,7 @@ int kvm_arch_init(void *opaque)
> > return rc;
> > }
> >
> > -void kvm_arch_exit(void)
> > +static void __kvm_s390_exit(void)
> > {
> > gmap_unregister_pte_notifier(&gmap_notifier);
> > gmap_unregister_pte_notifier(&vsie_gmap_notifier);
> > @@ -533,6 +533,16 @@ void kvm_arch_exit(void)
> > debug_unregister(kvm_s390_dbf_uv);
> > }
> >
> > +int kvm_arch_init(void *opaque)
> > +{
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +void kvm_arch_exit(void)
> > +{
> > +
> > +}
> > +
>
> I wonder at this point if it's possible to define kvm_arch_init and
> kvm_arch_exit directly in kvm_main.c with __weak
ah, nevermind, you get rid of them completely in the next patch
>
> > /* Section: device related */
> > long kvm_arch_dev_ioctl(struct file *filp,
> > unsigned int ioctl, unsigned long arg)
> > @@ -5634,7 +5644,7 @@ static inline unsigned long nonhyp_mask(int i)
> >
> > static int __init kvm_s390_init(void)
> > {
> > - int i;
> > + int i, r;
> >
> > if (!sclp.has_sief2) {
> > pr_info("SIE is not available\n");
> > @@ -5650,12 +5660,23 @@ static int __init kvm_s390_init(void)
> > kvm_s390_fac_base[i] |=
> > stfle_fac_list[i] & nonhyp_mask(i);
> >
> > - return kvm_init(NULL, sizeof(struct kvm_vcpu), 0, THIS_MODULE);
> > + r = __kvm_s390_init();
> > + if (r)
> > + return r;
> > +
> > + r = kvm_init(NULL, sizeof(struct kvm_vcpu), 0, THIS_MODULE);
> > + if (r) {
> > + __kvm_s390_exit();
> > + return r;
> > + }
> > + return 0;
> > }
> >
> > static void __exit kvm_s390_exit(void)
> > {
> > kvm_exit();
> > +
> > + __kvm_s390_exit();
> > }
> >
> > module_init(kvm_s390_init);
>
More information about the kvm-riscv
mailing list