[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201120120805.GF3021@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:08:05 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc: xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, luto@...nel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Deep Shah <sdeep@...are.com>,
"VMware, Inc." <pv-drivers@...are.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/12] x86/paravirt: remove no longer needed 32-bit
pvops cruft
On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 12:46:26PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote:
> +#define ____PVOP_CALL(rettype, op, clbr, call_clbr, extra_clbr, ...) \
> ({ \
> PVOP_CALL_ARGS; \
> PVOP_TEST_NULL(op); \
> + BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(rettype) > sizeof(unsigned long)); \
> + asm volatile(paravirt_alt(PARAVIRT_CALL) \
> + : call_clbr, ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT \
> + : paravirt_type(op), \
> + paravirt_clobber(clbr), \
> + ##__VA_ARGS__ \
> + : "memory", "cc" extra_clbr); \
> + (rettype)(__eax & PVOP_RETMASK(rettype)); \
> })
This is now very similar to ____PVOP_VCALL() (note how PVOP_CALL_ARGS is
PVOP_VCALL_ARGS).
Could we get away with doing something horrible like:
#define ____PVOP_VCALL(X...) (void)____PVOP_CALL(long, X)
?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists