[PATCH] kvm: x86: lapic: remove one redundant judging condition

2014-11-05 Thread Tiejun Chen 
Finally we always return highest_irr so its unnecessary to return -1
after check if highest_irr == -1.

Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen tiejun.c...@intel.com
---
 arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
index 5f574b4..e6a7eb6 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
@@ -1638,8 +1638,7 @@ int kvm_apic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
 
apic_update_ppr(apic);
highest_irr = apic_find_highest_irr(apic);
-   if ((highest_irr == -1) ||
-   ((highest_irr  0xF0) = kvm_apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI)))
+   if ((highest_irr  0xF0) = kvm_apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI))
return -1;
return highest_irr;
 }
-- 
1.9.1

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] kvm: x86: lapic: remove one redundant judging condition

2014-11-05 Thread Paolo Bonzini 
On 05/11/2014 10:03, Tiejun Chen wrote:
 Finally we always return highest_irr so its unnecessary to return -1
 after check if highest_irr == -1.
 
 Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen tiejun.c...@intel.com
 ---
  arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 3 +--
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
 
 diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
 index 5f574b4..e6a7eb6 100644
 --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
 +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
 @@ -1638,8 +1638,7 @@ int kvm_apic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  
   apic_update_ppr(apic);
   highest_irr = apic_find_highest_irr(apic);
 - if ((highest_irr == -1) ||
 - ((highest_irr  0xF0) = kvm_apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI)))
 + if ((highest_irr  0xF0) = kvm_apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI))
   return -1;
   return highest_irr;
  }

I think the code is clearer without this change.

The two returns mean:

- return -1: no interrupt to inject

- return highest_irr: inject this interrupt

With IRR equal to all zeroes (highest_irr = -1), your patch would make 
the if always false (current PPR is low, can inject the interrupt), 
but computing highest_irr  0xF0 would make no sense if highest_irr == 
-1.

To put it another way, imagine the code looked like this:

static inline int int_prio(int vector)
{
WARN_ON(vector == -1);
return vector  0xF0;
}
...

apic_update_ppr(apic);
highest_irr = apic_find_highest_irr(apic);
if (highest_irr == -1 ||
int_prio(highest_irr) = kvm_apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI))
return -1;
return highest_irr;

Then removing the check on highest_irr == -1 would trigger a warning.

Paolo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] kvm: x86: lapic: remove one redundant judging condition

2014-11-05 Thread Chen, Tiejun 

On 2014/11/5 18:22, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

On 05/11/2014 10:03, Tiejun Chen wrote:

Finally we always return highest_irr so its unnecessary to return -1
after check if highest_irr == -1.

Signed-off-by: Tiejun Chen tiejun.c...@intel.com
---
  arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 3 +--
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
index 5f574b4..e6a7eb6 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
@@ -1638,8 +1638,7 @@ int kvm_apic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)

apic_update_ppr(apic);
highest_irr = apic_find_highest_irr(apic);
-   if ((highest_irr == -1) ||
-   ((highest_irr  0xF0) = kvm_apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI)))
+   if ((highest_irr  0xF0) = kvm_apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI))
return -1;
return highest_irr;
  }


I think the code is clearer without this change.

The two returns mean:

- return -1: no interrupt to inject

- return highest_irr: inject this interrupt

With IRR equal to all zeroes (highest_irr = -1), your patch would make
the if always false (current PPR is low, can inject the interrupt),
but computing highest_irr  0xF0 would make no sense if highest_irr ==
-1.


Yeah, you're right so here is just a little confusion to read.

Actually what this code is doing looks like,

@@ -1638,7 +1638,7 @@ int kvm_apic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)

apic_update_ppr(apic);
highest_irr = apic_find_highest_irr(apic);
-   if ((highest_irr == -1) ||
+   if ((highest_irr != -1) 
((highest_irr  0xF0) = kvm_apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI)))
return -1;
return highest_irr;

But it's really no big deal so we can keep the original alive.

Thanks
Tiejun



To put it another way, imagine the code looked like this:

static inline int int_prio(int vector)
{
WARN_ON(vector == -1);
return vector  0xF0;
}
...

apic_update_ppr(apic);
highest_irr = apic_find_highest_irr(apic);
if (highest_irr == -1 ||
int_prio(highest_irr) = kvm_apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_PROCPRI))
return -1;
return highest_irr;

Then removing the check on highest_irr == -1 would trigger a warning.

Paolo


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html