RE: [PATCH v5 08/10] x86/hyper-v: use hypercall for remote TLB flush

[Jork Loeser]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Shevchenko [mailto:andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 09:53
> To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: x86@xxxxxxxxxx; devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; KY Srinivasan <kys@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Haiyang Zhang
> <haiyangz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>; H.
> Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>; Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Jork
> Loeser <Jork.Loeser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Simon Xiao <sixiao@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/10] x86/hyper-v: use hypercall for remote TLB flush
> 
> On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> > +#define HV_FLUSH_ALL_PROCESSORS                        0x00000001
> > +#define HV_FLUSH_ALL_VIRTUAL_ADDRESS_SPACES    0x00000002
> > +#define HV_FLUSH_NON_GLOBAL_MAPPINGS_ONLY      0x00000004
> > +#define HV_FLUSH_USE_EXTENDED_RANGE_FORMAT     0x00000008
> 
> BIT() ?

Certainly a matter of taste. Given that the Hyper-V spec lists these as hex numbers, I find the explicit numbers appropriate.

Regards,
Jork