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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 77AF5C433DF for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 09:07:29 +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 4629F20759 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 09:07:29 +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="Tb/YRNUR" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4629F20759 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 1k0LZf-0000f8-Sd; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 09:07:03 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k0LZe-0000f3-Ea for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 09:07:02 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: b25e04ae-d0b1-11ea-8b1c-bc764e2007e4 Received: from esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (unknown [216.71.155.175]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id b25e04ae-d0b1-11ea-8b1c-bc764e2007e4; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 09:07:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1595927221; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=PBb4O1ZjcnYgIxh0EQAN7soMcQ53JITdPUUJn86Y/z4=; b=Tb/YRNURN0atgUV8ELQ0XNP6lHTZb9B0UcdoxGOdBJ/vME8N2RmQEj7T zK6NtJrOEoU8jE7aSFunpHGGkWH6eE/cgTZNHH3oblCSGqXuSboS49p+g FdxnZqQ6wznpufjJuHuFFgNgmO3b5niALvAj5XCPDZWSKc4GZdMLOweVq g=; Authentication-Results: esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none IronPort-SDR: uTmgI8PxOzjXzTKFv/wuH25kCpkMuPEwq+7BWgPZv2kPlz8v6EpZPXhdFEz2dNXOmtaPEzonHB DCqEQ+nr//gDEkJQQkWdv5HeExG4xCv+cPStmbGxdX6oY7kLO/wx94zJtSzt1e18eM0iTb/+CJ CCVBwOV1uUQL77JM6ap2ZVHm4vhtZX8xhWPV8WtaKVYcRVeykIdBOWJLRbMRs3meBxi4EygrUB wetHtNoxdoHKPRp0MLQDcOMEp5Gr2o2wXG3wvww6WsdwtU5AnVQP3uzqFsoVXyjW2CLC34QUYs jQ4= X-SBRS: 2.7 X-MesageID: 23658075 X-Ironport-Server: esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,405,1589256000"; d="scan'208";a="23658075" Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 11:06:54 +0200 From: Roger Pau =?utf-8?B?TW9ubsOp?= To: Jan Beulich Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86: replace __ASM_{CL,ST}AC Message-ID: <20200728090618.GZ7191@Air-de-Roger> References: <58b9211a-f6dd-85da-d0bd-c927ac537a5d@suse.com> <20200727145526.GR7191@Air-de-Roger> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-ClientProxiedBy: AMSPEX02CAS02.citrite.net (10.69.22.113) 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 Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:47:52PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 27.07.2020 16:55, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 12:48:14PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > > > --- /dev/null > > > +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/asm-defns.h > > > > Maybe this could be asm-insn.h or a different name? I find it > > confusing to have asm-defns.h and an asm_defs.h. > > While indeed I anticipated a reply to this effect, I don't consider > asm-insn.h or asm-macros.h suitable: We don't want to limit this > header to a more narrow purpose than "all sorts of definition", I > don't think. Hence I chose that name despite its similarity to the > C header's one. I think it's confusing, but I also think the whole magic we do with asm includes is already confusing (me), so if you and Andrew agree this is the best name I'm certainly fine with it. FWIW: Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné Please quote the clac/stac instructions in order to match the other usages of ALTERNATIVE. Thanks, Roger.