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=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 79ACCC433E8 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 15:16:56 +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 47C3420672 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 15:16:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=citrix.com header.i=@citrix.com header.b="EyWp971M" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 47C3420672 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=citrix.com 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 1k04ro-0004qU-Fs; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 15:16:40 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k04rn-0004qP-Kq for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 15:16:39 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 2a8747f6-d01c-11ea-8acc-bc764e2007e4 Received: from esa2.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (unknown [216.71.145.153]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 2a8747f6-d01c-11ea-8acc-bc764e2007e4; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 15:16:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1595862998; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=QxHKKpPVPtY7n6gB7RbvButmrCihfJsVSdeL8qvd5wc=; b=EyWp971Mae8GGielSL3I6hDyQvsD4ryN4cIB249T/PTvUJ0+Jutlc4TX PfdMYFI6RBdwde/bWQrE/Dmr0NwD7yRbVxyNpCp6bBV1s1cDocloIHiAG McT2kvTPcMkmvGoQyD5NooLPErFUkWX0/pBbRbowdhiSiTc6Q1gG+Gfbc E=; Authentication-Results: esa2.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none IronPort-SDR: HTb+sqVtINoCdeeUBznbMtFR82HwkjLAIsfU5vtGkArlRP6rMMhwA1YFoYxW6DUHSioQ5dtwi+ jJ5LR+9o2HJ9hsxvdIv30l3Tzro+Fr41lmEQLOhG4Llf7VymmvGNm4bnLwPCCAHtvmSfUZgeoQ bTZ5Go1fiokDFdf9piqfYxBe7kdX3ta1gSELVbToNe0OAWugQ8ByokLsueKVYCh3irIUUxMpbR kmVn8BnC7N03jEfBJ1g/UiGm22wWA6O8jodL4d5vGoS+uc/+CogwWbkUnE+r0PNdy/sAZpiWqy 5ek= X-SBRS: 2.7 X-MesageID: 23281947 X-Ironport-Server: esa2.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,402,1589256000"; d="scan'208";a="23281947" Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 17:16:30 +0200 From: Roger Pau =?utf-8?B?TW9ubsOp?= To: Jan Beulich Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] x86: fold indirect_thunk_asm.h into asm-defns.h Message-ID: <20200727151630.GU7191@Air-de-Roger> References: <58b9211a-f6dd-85da-d0bd-c927ac537a5d@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-ClientProxiedBy: AMSPEX02CAS01.citrite.net (10.69.22.112) To AMSPEX02CL02.citrite.net (10.69.22.126) 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" , Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 12:49:40PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > There's little point in having two separate headers both getting > included by asm_defns.h. This in particular reduces the number of > instances of guarding asm(".include ...") suitably in such dual use > headers. > > No change to generated code. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich LGTM: Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné Some testing with clang might be required, as with the other patch. Thanks, Roger.