[PATCH 0/8] limit passing around of cpu_user_regs

Jan Beulich posted 8 patches 3 months, 3 weeks ago
Only 4 patches received!
There is a newer version of this series
[PATCH 0/8] limit passing around of cpu_user_regs
Posted by Jan Beulich 3 months, 3 weeks ago
Unlike (synchronous) exception handlers, interrupt handlers don't normally
have a need to know the outer context's register state. Similarly, the vast
majority of key handlers has no need for such.

1: keyhandler: don't pass cpu_user_regs around
2: IRQ: generalize [gs]et_irq_regs()
3: serial: drop serial_rx_fn's regs parameter
4: PV-shim: drop pv_console_rx()'s regs parameter
5: serial: drop serial_[rt]x_interrupt()'s regs parameter
6: IRQ: drop regs parameter from handler functions
7: x86/vPMU: drop regs parameter from interrupt functions
8: x86/APIC: drop regs parameter from direct vector handler functions

Jan
Re: [PATCH 0/8] limit passing around of cpu_user_regs
Posted by Jan Beulich 3 months, 3 weeks ago
On 11.01.2024 08:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Unlike (synchronous) exception handlers, interrupt handlers don't normally
> have a need to know the outer context's register state. Similarly, the vast
> majority of key handlers has no need for such.
> 
> 1: keyhandler: don't pass cpu_user_regs around
> 2: IRQ: generalize [gs]et_irq_regs()
> 3: serial: drop serial_rx_fn's regs parameter
> 4: PV-shim: drop pv_console_rx()'s regs parameter
> 5: serial: drop serial_[rt]x_interrupt()'s regs parameter
> 6: IRQ: drop regs parameter from handler functions
> 7: x86/vPMU: drop regs parameter from interrupt functions
> 8: x86/APIC: drop regs parameter from direct vector handler functions

I'm sorry, I need to start over - somehow ordering got confused in the
reply-to-s sent so far.

Jan