[v2] xen/public: arch-arm: Restrict the visibility of struct vcpu_guest_core_regs

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen/public: arch-arm: Restrict the visibility of struct vcpu_guest_core_regs

Posted by Julien Grall 6 years, 8 months ago

Currently, the structure vcpu_guest_core_regs is part of the public API.
This implies that any change in the structure should be backward
compatible.

However, the structure is only needed by the tools and Xen. It is also
not expected to be ever used outside of that context. So we could save us
some headache by only declaring the structure for Xen and tools.

Suggested-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>

---
    This is a follow-up of the discussion [1].

    As this is now Xen and tools only, I am wondering whether the check on
    GNU_C is still necessary. I am happy to send a follow-up patch (or fold
    in this one) if it can be removed.

    [1] <3c245c5b-51c6-1d0e-ad6c-42414573166f@arm.com>
---
 xen/include/public/arch-arm.h | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/xen/include/public/arch-arm.h b/xen/include/public/arch-arm.h
index eb424e8286..e9a86d8eb8 100644
--- a/xen/include/public/arch-arm.h
+++ b/xen/include/public/arch-arm.h
@@ -197,6 +197,7 @@
     } while ( 0 )
 #define set_xen_guest_handle(hnd, val) set_xen_guest_handle_raw(hnd, val)
 
+#if defined(__XEN__) || defined(__XEN_TOOLS__)
 #if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__STRICT_ANSI__)
 /* Anonymous union includes both 32- and 64-bit names (e.g., r0/x0). */
 # define __DECL_REG(n64, n32) union {          \
@@ -272,6 +273,8 @@ DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(vcpu_guest_core_regs_t);
 
 #undef __DECL_REG
 
+#endif
+
 typedef uint64_t xen_pfn_t;
 #define PRI_xen_pfn PRIx64
 #define PRIu_xen_pfn PRIu64
-- 
2.11.0


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen/public: arch-arm: Restrict the visibility of struct vcpu_guest_core_regs

Posted by Jan Beulich 6 years, 8 months ago

>>> On 03.06.19 at 18:11, <julien.grall@arm.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/include/public/arch-arm.h
> +++ b/xen/include/public/arch-arm.h
> @@ -197,6 +197,7 @@
>      } while ( 0 )
>  #define set_xen_guest_handle(hnd, val) set_xen_guest_handle_raw(hnd, val)
>  
> +#if defined(__XEN__) || defined(__XEN_TOOLS__)
>  #if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__STRICT_ANSI__)
>  /* Anonymous union includes both 32- and 64-bit names (e.g., r0/x0). */
>  # define __DECL_REG(n64, n32) union {          \
> @@ -272,6 +273,8 @@ DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(vcpu_guest_core_regs_t);
>  
>  #undef __DECL_REG
>  
> +#endif
> +
>  typedef uint64_t xen_pfn_t;
>  #define PRI_xen_pfn PRIx64
>  #define PRIu_xen_pfn PRIu64

I'm puzzled by you still adding another #if, rather than moving the
block down into the existing one. You said you'd wait for Stefano's
opinion, and he asked that you follow my suggestion. Did I miss
some further part of the discussion?

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen/public: arch-arm: Restrict the visibility of struct vcpu_guest_core_regs

Posted by Julien Grall 6 years, 8 months ago

Hi Jan,

On 6/4/19 8:15 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 03.06.19 at 18:11, <julien.grall@arm.com> wrote:
>> --- a/xen/include/public/arch-arm.h
>> +++ b/xen/include/public/arch-arm.h
>> @@ -197,6 +197,7 @@
>>       } while ( 0 )
>>   #define set_xen_guest_handle(hnd, val) set_xen_guest_handle_raw(hnd, val)
>>   
>> +#if defined(__XEN__) || defined(__XEN_TOOLS__)
>>   #if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__STRICT_ANSI__)
>>   /* Anonymous union includes both 32- and 64-bit names (e.g., r0/x0). */
>>   # define __DECL_REG(n64, n32) union {          \
>> @@ -272,6 +273,8 @@ DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(vcpu_guest_core_regs_t);
>>   
>>   #undef __DECL_REG
>>   
>> +#endif
>> +
>>   typedef uint64_t xen_pfn_t;
>>   #define PRI_xen_pfn PRIx64
>>   #define PRIu_xen_pfn PRIu64
> 
> I'm puzzled by you still adding another #if, rather than moving the
> block down into the existing one. You said you'd wait for Stefano's
> opinion, and he asked that you follow my suggestion. Did I miss
> some further part of the discussion?

No I have sent the wrong version. Not sure how because the changes are 
correct in the branch I am using.

Sorry for the inconvenience, I will resend the patch.

Cheers,

-- 
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel