From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 1/5] x86: provide add_sized()
Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 10:35:05 +0100
Message-ID: <55531AC9.7050603@citrix.com>
References: <1431355025-20468-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
	<1431355025-20468-2-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
	<5553343F0200007800079E6D@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <david.vrabel@citrix.com>) id 1YsT4J-0006J8-MI
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 13 May 2015 09:35:11 +0000
In-Reply-To: <5553343F0200007800079E6D@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Jennifer Herbert <jennifer.herbert@citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 13/05/15 10:23, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 11.05.15 at 16:37, <david.vrabel@citrix.com> wrote:
>> @@ -53,6 +67,19 @@ void __bad_atomic_size(void);
>>      }                                                     \
>>  })
>>  
>> +#define add_sized(p, x) ({                                \
>> +    typeof(*(p)) __x = (x);                               \
>> +    unsigned long x_ = (unsigned long)__x;                \
> 
> So is there a particular reason you kept this double type conversion?
> As said earlier, I can see why write_atomic() wants it, but I don't see
> the need here.

I kept it in case typeof (*p) wasn't a numeric type (like a struct { u32
a; }) and needed the cast to unsigned long, although in hindsight I'm
not sure this really makes any sense.

David

>> +    switch ( sizeof(*(p)) )                               \
>> +    {                                                     \
>> +    case 1: add_u8_sized((uint8_t *)(p), x_); break;      \
>> +    case 2: add_u16_sized((uint16_t *)(p), x_); break;    \
>> +    case 4: add_u32_sized((uint32_t *)(p), x_); break;    \
>> +    case 8: add_u64_sized((uint64_t *)(p), x_); break;    \
>> +    default: __bad_atomic_size(); break;                  \
>> +    }                                                     \
>> +})
> 
>