| Message ID | 20240715044955.3954304-8-zhao1.liu@intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | target/i386: Misc cleanup on KVM PV defs, outdated comments and error handling | expand |
On 7/14/2024 9:49 PM, Zhao Liu wrote: > @@ -5274,13 +5272,13 @@ void kvm_arch_update_guest_debug(CPUState *cpu, struct kvm_guest_debug *dbg) > } > } > > -static bool kvm_install_msr_filters(KVMState *s) > +static int kvm_install_msr_filters(KVMState *s) > { > uint64_t zero = 0; > struct kvm_msr_filter filter = { > .flags = KVM_MSR_FILTER_DEFAULT_ALLOW, > }; > - int r, i, j = 0; > + int ret, i, j = 0; > > for (i = 0; i < KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES; i++) { Nit: Since it's a clean up patch, how about replace KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES with ARRAY_SIZE(msr_handlers), to make the code consistent in other places to refer to the array size of msr_handlers[]. > KVMMSRHandlers *handler = &msr_handlers[i]; > @@ -5304,18 +5302,18 @@ static bool kvm_install_msr_filters(KVMState *s) > } > } > > - r = kvm_vm_ioctl(s, KVM_X86_SET_MSR_FILTER, &filter); > - if (r) { > - return false; > + ret = kvm_vm_ioctl(s, KVM_X86_SET_MSR_FILTER, &filter); > + if (ret) { > + return ret; > } > > - return true; > + return 0; > } Nit: Seems ret is not needed here, and can directly return kvm_vm_ioctl();
Hi Zide, On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 03:18:07PM -0700, Chen, Zide wrote: > Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:18:07 -0700 > From: "Chen, Zide" <zide.chen@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/8] target/i386/kvm: Clean up return values of MSR > filter related functions > > On 7/14/2024 9:49 PM, Zhao Liu wrote: > > @@ -5274,13 +5272,13 @@ void kvm_arch_update_guest_debug(CPUState *cpu, struct kvm_guest_debug *dbg) > > } > > } > > > > -static bool kvm_install_msr_filters(KVMState *s) > > +static int kvm_install_msr_filters(KVMState *s) > > { > > uint64_t zero = 0; > > struct kvm_msr_filter filter = { > > .flags = KVM_MSR_FILTER_DEFAULT_ALLOW, > > }; > > - int r, i, j = 0; > > + int ret, i, j = 0; > > > > for (i = 0; i < KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES; i++) { > > Nit: Since it's a clean up patch, how about replace > KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES with ARRAY_SIZE(msr_handlers), to make the > code consistent in other places to refer to the array size of > msr_handlers[]. Yes, that's fine, I'll add a new small trivial patch to clean up this. > > KVMMSRHandlers *handler = &msr_handlers[i]; > > @@ -5304,18 +5302,18 @@ static bool kvm_install_msr_filters(KVMState *s) > > } > > } > > > > - r = kvm_vm_ioctl(s, KVM_X86_SET_MSR_FILTER, &filter); > > - if (r) { > > - return false; > > + ret = kvm_vm_ioctl(s, KVM_X86_SET_MSR_FILTER, &filter); > > + if (ret) { > > + return ret; > > } > > > > - return true; > > + return 0; > > } > > Nit: Seems ret is not needed here, and can directly return kvm_vm_ioctl(); Yes, good catch! Thanks for you review! Zhao
diff --git a/target/i386/kvm/kvm.c b/target/i386/kvm/kvm.c index 4aae4ffc9ccd..0fd1d099ae4c 100644 --- a/target/i386/kvm/kvm.c +++ b/target/i386/kvm/kvm.c @@ -2780,8 +2780,6 @@ int kvm_arch_init(MachineState *ms, KVMState *s) } } if (kvm_vm_check_extension(s, KVM_CAP_X86_USER_SPACE_MSR)) { - bool r; - ret = kvm_vm_enable_cap(s, KVM_CAP_X86_USER_SPACE_MSR, 0, KVM_MSR_EXIT_REASON_FILTER); if (ret) { @@ -2790,9 +2788,9 @@ int kvm_arch_init(MachineState *ms, KVMState *s) exit(1); } - r = kvm_filter_msr(s, MSR_CORE_THREAD_COUNT, - kvm_rdmsr_core_thread_count, NULL); - if (!r) { + ret = kvm_filter_msr(s, MSR_CORE_THREAD_COUNT, + kvm_rdmsr_core_thread_count, NULL); + if (ret) { error_report("Could not install MSR_CORE_THREAD_COUNT handler: %s", strerror(-ret)); exit(1); @@ -5274,13 +5272,13 @@ void kvm_arch_update_guest_debug(CPUState *cpu, struct kvm_guest_debug *dbg) } } -static bool kvm_install_msr_filters(KVMState *s) +static int kvm_install_msr_filters(KVMState *s) { uint64_t zero = 0; struct kvm_msr_filter filter = { .flags = KVM_MSR_FILTER_DEFAULT_ALLOW, }; - int r, i, j = 0; + int ret, i, j = 0; for (i = 0; i < KVM_MSR_FILTER_MAX_RANGES; i++) { KVMMSRHandlers *handler = &msr_handlers[i]; @@ -5304,18 +5302,18 @@ static bool kvm_install_msr_filters(KVMState *s) } } - r = kvm_vm_ioctl(s, KVM_X86_SET_MSR_FILTER, &filter); - if (r) { - return false; + ret = kvm_vm_ioctl(s, KVM_X86_SET_MSR_FILTER, &filter); + if (ret) { + return ret; } - return true; + return 0; } -bool kvm_filter_msr(KVMState *s, uint32_t msr, QEMURDMSRHandler *rdmsr, - QEMUWRMSRHandler *wrmsr) +int kvm_filter_msr(KVMState *s, uint32_t msr, QEMURDMSRHandler *rdmsr, + QEMUWRMSRHandler *wrmsr) { - int i; + int i, ret; for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(msr_handlers); i++) { if (!msr_handlers[i].msr) { @@ -5325,16 +5323,17 @@ bool kvm_filter_msr(KVMState *s, uint32_t msr, QEMURDMSRHandler *rdmsr, .wrmsr = wrmsr, }; - if (!kvm_install_msr_filters(s)) { + ret = kvm_install_msr_filters(s); + if (ret) { msr_handlers[i] = (KVMMSRHandlers) { }; - return false; + return ret; } - return true; + return 0; } } - return false; + return 0; } static int kvm_handle_rdmsr(X86CPU *cpu, struct kvm_run *run) diff --git a/target/i386/kvm/kvm_i386.h b/target/i386/kvm/kvm_i386.h index 34fc60774b86..91c2d6e69163 100644 --- a/target/i386/kvm/kvm_i386.h +++ b/target/i386/kvm/kvm_i386.h @@ -74,8 +74,8 @@ typedef struct kvm_msr_handlers { QEMUWRMSRHandler *wrmsr; } KVMMSRHandlers; -bool kvm_filter_msr(KVMState *s, uint32_t msr, QEMURDMSRHandler *rdmsr, - QEMUWRMSRHandler *wrmsr); +int kvm_filter_msr(KVMState *s, uint32_t msr, QEMURDMSRHandler *rdmsr, + QEMUWRMSRHandler *wrmsr); #endif /* CONFIG_KVM */
At present, the error code of MSR filter enablement is attempted to be printed in error_report(). Unfortunately, this behavior doesn't work because the MSR filter-related functions return the boolean and current error_report() use the wrong return value. So fix this by making MSR filter related functions return int type and printing such returned value in error_report(). Signed-off-by: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@intel.com> --- target/i386/kvm/kvm.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++------------------ target/i386/kvm/kvm_i386.h | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)