Re: [PATCH 4/4] KVM: Rename functions related to enabling virtualization hardware

[Huang, Kai]

On Thu, 2024-04-25 at 16:39 -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Rename the various functions that enable virtualization to prepare for
> upcoming changes, and to clean up artifacts of KVM's previous behavior,
> which required manually juggling locks around kvm_usage_count.
> 
> Drop the "nolock" qualifier from per-CPU functions now that there are no
> "nolock" implementations of the "all" variants, i.e. now that calling a
> non-nolock function from a nolock function isn't confusing (unlike this
> sentence).
> 
> Drop "all" from the outer helpers as they no longer manually iterate
> over all CPUs, and because it might not be obvious what "all" refers to.
> Instead, use double-underscores to communicate that the per-CPU functions
> are helpers to the outer APIs.
> 

I kinda prefer

	cpu_enable_virtualization();

instead of

	__kvm_enable_virtualization();

But obviously not a strong opinion :-)