Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 4/9] x86/HVM: move NOFLUSH handling out of hvm_set_cr3()

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 17.09.2019 14:45, Paul Durrant wrote:
>> From: Xen-devel <xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Jan 
>> Beulich
>> Sent: 17 September 2019 07:15
>>
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/emulate.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/emulate.c
>> @@ -2080,6 +2080,8 @@ static int hvmemul_write_cr(
>>      HVMTRACE_LONG_2D(CR_WRITE, reg, TRC_PAR_LONG(val));
>>      switch ( reg )
>>      {
>> +        bool noflush;
>> +
> 
> I said this before... I think the tighter case-scope is better.

I recall you saying so, but I don't recall you actually making this a
requirement to get your ack.

> Cosmetically it may look a little odd, but surely it gives the
> compiler a better chance to optimize?

I don't think so - they're pretty good to limit the life range of
variables (at least in not overly hairy functions) these days. The
more narrow scopes we often ask for are more for the reader to
easily know what the intended usage range of a variable is.

Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel