[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5c123e7f-299d-2a4c-3e30-878537d71546@suse.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 13:16:19 +0100
From: Jürgen Groß <jgross@...e.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
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 20.11.20 13:08, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 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)
>
> ?
Oh, indeed. And in patch 9 the same could be done for the ALT variants.
Juergen
Download attachment "OpenPGP_0xB0DE9DD628BF132F.asc" of type "application/pgp-keys" (3092 bytes)
Download attachment "OpenPGP_signature" of type "application/pgp-signature" (496 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists