[PATCH] KVM: Fix kvm_vcpu_map[_readonly]() function prototypes

[Peter Fang]

On Sat, Apr 04, 2026 at 03:07:01PM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> Yosry Ahmed <yosry at kernel.org> writes:
> 
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 02:15:11AM -0700, Peter Fang wrote:
> >> kvm_vcpu_map() and kvm_vcpu_map_readonly() should take a gfn instead of
> >> a gpa. This appears to be a result of the original kvm_vcpu_map() being
> >> declared with the wrong function prototype in kvm_host.h, even though
> >> it was correct in the actual implementation in kvm_main.c.
> >> 
> >> No actual harm has been done yet as all of the call sites are correctly
> >> passing in a gfn. Plus, both gfn_t and gpa_t are typedef'd to u64 so
> >> this change shouldn't have any functional impact.
> >> 
> >> Compile-tested on x86 and ppc, which are the current users of these
> >> interfaces.
> 
> Mostly a mechanical change. I had looked at ppc call site and looks ok
> to me.

Thanks for reviewing the ppc part! v2 with the suggested changes will be
posted soon.

> 
> >> 
> >> Fixes: e45adf665a53 ("KVM: Introduce a new guest mapping API")
> >> Cc: KarimAllah Ahmed <karahmed at amazon.de>
> >> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk at oracle.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Fang <peter.fang at intel.com>
> >
> > Most callers are converting a GPA to a GFN, I wonder if we should make
> > the function take in a GPA instead? But then we'll need to the GPA not
> > being aligned to a page boundary (either do gpa_to_gfn() in
> > __kvm_vcpu_map() or fail if it's not aligned).
> >
> > Not sure if that's a net improvement, mostly thinking out loud here.
> 
> The suggestion from Yosry and Sean sounds good too. Instead of every
> caller of kvm_vcpu_map() doing gpa_to_gfn(), we may as well make
> kvm_vcpu_map() accept gpa_t instead and do the gpa_to_gfn() inside
> kvm_vcpu_map() in the call to __kvm_vcpu_map(vcpu, gpa_to_gfn(gpa),...),
> or within __kvm_vcpu_map() which is fine too, however, the former is a
> better approach, IMO.
> 
> -ritesh