From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Durrant Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 07/17] x86/hvm: add length to mmio check op Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:34:45 +0000 Message-ID: <9AAE0902D5BC7E449B7C8E4E778ABCD02596BAA2@AMSPEX01CL02.citrite.net> References: <1435145089-21999-1-git-send-email-paul.durrant@citrix.com> <1435145089-21999-8-git-send-email-paul.durrant@citrix.com> <558AC7E80200007800088E7E@mail.emea.novell.com> <9AAE0902D5BC7E449B7C8E4E778ABCD02596B9DD@AMSPEX01CL02.citrite.net> <558ACBD40200007800088EE6@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Z7kpF-0003h3-Gk for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 13:34:49 +0000 In-Reply-To: <558ACBD40200007800088EE6@mail.emea.novell.com> Content-Language: en-US List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Andrew Cooper , "Keir (Xen.org)" , "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@suse.com] > Sent: 24 June 2015 14:25 > To: Paul Durrant > Cc: Andrew Cooper; xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Keir (Xen.org) > Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 07/17] x86/hvm: add length to mmio > check op > > >>> On 24.06.15 at 15:14, wrote: > >> From: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org [mailto:xen-devel- > >> bounces@lists.xen.org] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich > >> Sent: 24 June 2015 14:08 > >> >>> On 24.06.15 at 13:24, wrote: > >> > --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/io.h > >> > +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/io.h > >> > @@ -35,7 +35,9 @@ typedef int (*hvm_mmio_write_t)(struct vcpu *v, > >> > unsigned long addr, > >> > unsigned long length, > >> > unsigned long val); > >> > -typedef int (*hvm_mmio_check_t)(struct vcpu *v, unsigned long > addr); > >> > +typedef int (*hvm_mmio_check_t)(struct vcpu *v, > >> > + unsigned long addr, > >> > + unsigned long length); > >> > >> I don't think this really needs to be "long"? > >> > > > > For consistency with the mmio read and write function types I went with > > 'long'. Is there any harm in that? > > Generally generates worse code (due to the need for the REX64 > prefix on all involved instructions). Perhaps the other ones don't > need sizes/lengths passed as longs either? > I'm happy to do it that way round if you don't mind the extra diffs. I'll do it as a separate patch just before this one, to ease review. Paul > Jan