[PATCH v2 2/3] RISC-V: KVM: Convert extension_disabled[] to ext_status[]

[Andrew Jones]

On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 10:28:16PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 3:55 PM Andrew Jones <ajones at ventanamicro.com> wrote:
> >
> > Change the boolean extension_disabled[] array to an array of enums,
> > ext_status[]. For now, the enum only has two states, which correspond
> > to the previous boolean states, so this patch has no intended
> > functional change. The next patch will add another state, expanding
> > the purpose of ext_status[].
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jones <ajones at ventanamicro.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h | 7 ++++++-
> >  arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c             | 9 ++++++---
> >  2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
> > index 4278125a38a5..cda99fc3d897 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/kvm_vcpu_sbi.h
> > @@ -14,9 +14,14 @@
> >  #define KVM_SBI_VERSION_MAJOR 1
> >  #define KVM_SBI_VERSION_MINOR 0
> >
> > +enum KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_STATUS {
> 
> This upper-case name of enum looks odd.

I agree. I saw the uppercase enum names in the uapi and matched that, but
now I see the non-uapi enums have normal lowercase names. I'll send a v3
with a lowercase name.

> 
> > +       KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE,
> > +       KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE,
> > +};
> > +
> >  struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_context {
> >         int return_handled;
> > -       bool extension_disabled[KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_MAX];
> > +       enum KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_STATUS ext_status[KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_MAX];
> >  };
> >
> >  struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_return {
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> > index 6aa15f1b97d9..28e55ba023dc 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kvm/vcpu_sbi.c
> > @@ -155,7 +155,8 @@ static int riscv_vcpu_set_sbi_ext_single(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> >         if (!sext)
> >                 return -ENOENT;
> >
> > -       scontext->extension_disabled[sext->ext_idx] = !reg_val;
> > +       scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] = reg_val ?
> > +               KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE : KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE;
> >
> >         return 0;
> >  }
> > @@ -180,7 +181,8 @@ static int riscv_vcpu_get_sbi_ext_single(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> >         if (!sext)
> >                 return -ENOENT;
> >
> > -       *reg_val = !scontext->extension_disabled[sext->ext_idx];
> > +       *reg_val = scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] ==
> > +                               KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_AVAILABLE;
> >
> >         return 0;
> >  }
> > @@ -316,7 +318,8 @@ const struct kvm_vcpu_sbi_extension *kvm_vcpu_sbi_find_ext(
> >                 if (sext->ext_ptr->extid_start <= extid &&
> >                     sext->ext_ptr->extid_end >= extid) {
> >                         if (sext->ext_idx < KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_MAX &&
> > -                           scontext->extension_disabled[sext->ext_idx])
> > +                           scontext->ext_status[sext->ext_idx] ==
> > +                                               KVM_RISCV_SBI_EXT_UNAVAILABLE)
> >                                 return NULL;
> >                         return sbi_ext[i].ext_ptr;
> >                 }
> > --
> > 2.40.1
> >
> 
> Otherwise, this looks good to me.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Anup Patel <anup at brainfault.org>
>

Thanks,
drew