You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
KVM: arm64: PMU: Assume PMU presence in pmu-emul.c
Many functions in pmu-emul.c checks kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu). A favorable
interpretation is defensive programming, but it also has downsides:
- It is confusing as it implies these functions are called without PMU
although most of them are called only when a PMU is present.
- It makes semantics of functions fuzzy. For example, calling
kvm_pmu_disable_counter_mask() without PMU may result in no-op as
there are no enabled counters, but it's unclear what
kvm_pmu_get_counter_value() returns when there is no PMU.
- It allows callers without checking kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu), but it is
often wrong to call these functions without PMU.
- It is error-prone to duplicate kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) checks into
multiple functions. Many functions are called for system registers,
and the system register infrastructure already employs less
error-prone, comprehensive checks.
Check kvm_vcpu_has_pmu(vcpu) in callers of these functions instead,
and remove the obsolete checks from pmu-emul.c. The only exceptions are
the functions that implement ioctls as they have definitive semantics
even when the PMU is not present.
Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@daynix.com>
Reviewed-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250315-pmc-v5-2-ecee87dab216@daynix.com
Signed-off-by: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
0 commit comments