From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AF99C28CBC for ; Wed, 6 May 2020 09:45:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3050D2070B for ; Wed, 6 May 2020 09:45:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=xen.org header.i=@xen.org header.b="xUO5jh5S" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3050D2070B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xen.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jWGcI-0000Dy-NX; Wed, 06 May 2020 09:45:26 +0000 Received: from all-amaz-eas1.inumbo.com ([34.197.232.57] helo=us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jWGcH-0000Ds-HV for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 06 May 2020 09:45:25 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 4f0981a5-8f7e-11ea-9e2b-12813bfff9fa Received: from mail.xenproject.org (unknown [104.130.215.37]) by us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 4f0981a5-8f7e-11ea-9e2b-12813bfff9fa; Wed, 06 May 2020 09:45:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xen.org; s=20200302mail; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=YTAfR6Ikyr6Y/khl6iA0fhEplgR7Z4Y3RkEVfoPbqoc=; b=xUO5jh5Sf1YvzpbCKj3LhpcP/v uL/FE1O91wnQZSLOnzvgowv11WruYb65ppD5L2WXUSH04qSg/IFE8U8ICQ/ymw3yIv7YP8dDR/Cwb TKDTEIQ0q3/9HeAo3+B2YaNaKi4lPyMwNGwiIlyEuY8+ENIIrdHpWM0KvGf7LuKR/q5c=; Received: from xenbits.xenproject.org ([104.239.192.120]) by mail.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jWGcG-0000wh-AV; Wed, 06 May 2020 09:45:24 +0000 Received: from [54.239.6.186] (helo=a483e7b01a66.ant.amazon.com) by xenbits.xenproject.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jWGcG-0000VQ-3g; Wed, 06 May 2020 09:45:24 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] x86: adjustments to guest handle treatment To: Jan Beulich , Andrew Cooper , Stefano Stabellini References: <9d4b738a-4487-6bfc-3076-597d074c7b47@suse.com> <20200422082610.GA28601@Air-de-Roger> <0b43670b-cc0b-0b0b-ef24-4734de35d4b7@suse.com> From: Julien Grall Message-ID: <6eaa1d25-7a91-d2ef-db01-20c5cb5101c4@xen.org> Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 10:45:22 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0b43670b-cc0b-0b0b-ef24-4734de35d4b7@suse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" , Tim Deegan , George Dunlap , Wei Liu , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" Hi Jan, On 05/05/2020 07:26, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 22.04.2020 10:26, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 11:13:23AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> First of all avoid excessive conversions. copy_{from,to}_guest(), for >>> example, work fine with all of XEN_GUEST_HANDLE{,_64,_PARAM}(). >>> >>> Further >>> - do_physdev_op_compat() didn't use the param form for its parameter, >>> - {hap,shadow}_track_dirty_vram() wrongly used the param form, >>> - compat processor Px logic failed to check compatibility of native and >>> compat structures not further converted. >>> >>> As this eliminates all users of guest_handle_from_param() and as there's >>> no real need to allow for conversions in both directions, drop the >>> macros as well. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich >>> [...] >>> --- a/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c >>> +++ b/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c >>> @@ -492,7 +492,7 @@ int do_pm_op(struct xen_sysctl_pm_op *op >>> return ret; >>> } >>> >>> -int acpi_set_pdc_bits(u32 acpi_id, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(uint32) pdc) >>> +int acpi_set_pdc_bits(u32 acpi_id, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(uint32) pdc) >> >> Nit: switch to uint32_t while there? >> >> Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné > > Unless I hear objections, I'm intending to commit this then in a > day or two with the suggested change made and the R-b given. Of > course a formally required ack for the Arm side dropping of > guest_handle_from_param() would still be nice ... I missed the small change on Arm sorry: Acked-by: Julien Grall Cheers, -- Julien Grall