[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <597dcaf4-19c0-3507-ebfa-e07cb32f784c@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2021 15:25:07 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: isaku.yamahata@...el.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, erdemaktas@...gle.com,
Connor Kuehl <ckuehl@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: isaku.yamahata@...il.com,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@...ux.intel.com>,
Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 09/69] KVM: TDX: Add C wrapper functions for TDX
SEAMCALLs
On 03/07/21 00:04, isaku.yamahata@...el.com wrote:
> +static inline u64 tdh_mng_addcx(hpa_t tdr, hpa_t addr)
> +{
> + return seamcall(TDH_MNG_ADDCX, addr, tdr, 0, 0, 0, NULL);
> +}
> +
Since you have wrappers anyway, I don't like having an extra macro level
just to remove the SEAMCALL_ prefix. It messes up editors that look up
the symbols.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists