Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Use a stable condition around all VT-d PI paths

On 11/16/21 18:42, Sean Christopherson wrote:

...

• return kvm_arch_has_assigned_device(kvm) &&

• irq_remapping_cap(IRQ_POSTING_CAP) &&
  

• irqchip_in_kernel(kvm) && enable_apicv;
  

Bad indentation/alignment.

What is even the right indentation? I'd just wrap everything in parentheses but then check patch complains "return is not a function" (NSS), so I went for two tabs and called it a day.

Not that it's likely to matter, but would it make sense to invert the checks so that they're short-circuited on the faster KVM checks? E.g. fastest to slowest:

return irqchip_in_kernel(kvm) && enable_apic && kvm_arch_has_assigned_device(kvm) && irq_remapping_cap(IRQ_POSTING_CAP);

Sure, why not.

Paolo