* Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shish...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> writes: > > >> @@ -3144,6 +3146,8 @@ static void vmclear_local_loaded_vmcss(void) > >> static void kvm_cpu_vmxoff(void) > >> { > >> asm volatile (__ex(ASM_VMX_VMXOFF) : : : "cc"); > >> + > >> + intel_pt_vmx(0); > >> } > > > > Yeah so the name intel_pt_vmx() is pretty information-free because it has > > no verb, > > only nouns - please name new functions descriptively to after what they do! > > I do agree that it can use a better name (and this is a second attempt > already). > > > Something like intel_pt_set_vmx_state() or so? > > Hmm how about intel_pt_handle_vmx()? Ideally, akin to the VMXON/VMXOFF insns, > this could be two functions (intel_pt_handle_vmx{on,off}()) if the global > namespace can take it.
Sure, intel_pt_handle_vmx(0/1) sounds good too. I wouldn't split it into two functions ... Thanks, Ingo