Re: [PATCH v1 03/11] KVM: arm64: Use guard()/scoped_guard() in arm64 KVM EL1 code

[Fuad Tabba]

On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 at 10:23, Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 12 Jun 2026 07:59:17 +0100,
> tabba@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > Convert the manual mutex_lock()/spin_lock() pairs in
> > arch/arm64/kvm/{pkvm,arm,mmu,reset,psci}.c to guard(mutex),
> > guard(spinlock) and scoped_guard(), dropping unlock-only goto labels in
> > favour of direct returns. Centralised cleanup gotos that still serve
> > other resources are preserved.
> >
> > reset.c uses scoped_guard() rather than guard() so the lock covers only
> > the small read/update window inside kvm_reset_vcpu(), leaving the rest
> > of the function outside the critical section.
>
> To be brutally honest, I don't think this sort of widespread changes
> bring us anything. This is just churn.
>
> Sure, if you are reworking a particular bit of code that is goto-heavy
> for the purpose of error handling, this has the potential to cleanup
> the code *while you are changing it*.
>
> But doing it for the sake of doing it? I think we have bigger fish to
> fry right now.

I understand what you mean. Would you like me to drop all of the guard
patches, or only those that go beyond the code changed in this series?

Thanks,
/fuad

>
>         M.
>
> --
> Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.