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 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 smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A0E7C00A8F for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 13:42:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.621982.969017 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qvHfb-0002I5-IC; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 13:42:07 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 621982.969017; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 13:42:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qvHfb-0002Hy-Fi; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 13:42:07 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 621982; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 13:42:05 +0000 Received: from se1-gles-flk1-in.inumbo.com ([94.247.172.50] helo=se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qvHfZ-0002GM-Ks for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 13:42:05 +0000 Received: from support.bugseng.com (mail.bugseng.com [162.55.131.47]) by se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 1ad681c9-7273-11ee-9b0e-b553b5be7939; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 15:41:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from support.bugseng.com (support.bugseng.com [162.55.131.47]) by support.bugseng.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 209CA4EE0739; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 15:41:59 +0200 (CEST) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: 1ad681c9-7273-11ee-9b0e-b553b5be7939 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 15:41:59 +0200 From: Nicola Vetrini To: Jan Beulich , Stefano Stabellini Cc: sstabellini@kernel.org, michal.orzel@amd.com, xenia.ragiadakou@amd.com, ayan.kumar.halder@amd.com, consulting@bugseng.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, roger.pau@citrix.com, Wei Liu , Jun Nakajima , Kevin Tian , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Subject: Re: [XEN PATCH][for-4.19 v4 3/8] x86: add deviation comments for asm-only functions In-Reply-To: <52422128-156d-5d6c-46b2-261b1c7e85c0@suse.com> References: <36d24b3a3e264f0e0b265b4f68d6432a143d64cd.1698053876.git.nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com> <2d92ef1f753165e2fa9cc7c04c219217@bugseng.com> <52422128-156d-5d6c-46b2-261b1c7e85c0@suse.com> User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.3 Message-ID: <734cc13409b44f709649895d76d388e2@bugseng.com> X-Sender: nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com Organization: BUGSENG s.r.l. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 24/10/2023 10:14, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 24.10.2023 10:01, Nicola Vetrini wrote: >> On 24/10/2023 09:50, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 23.10.2023 11:56, Nicola Vetrini wrote: >>>> As stated in rules.rst, functions used only in asm code >>>> are allowed to have no prior declaration visible when being >>>> defined, hence these functions are deviated. >>>> This also fixes violations of MISRA C:2012 Rule 8.4. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini >>>> Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini >>>> --- >>>> Changes in v3: >>>> - added SAF deviations for vmx counterparts to svm functions. >>> >>> Same comment regarding the R-b here as for patch 2. >>> >>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/svm/intr.c >>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/svm/intr.c >>>> @@ -123,6 +123,7 @@ static void svm_enable_intr_window(struct vcpu >>>> *v, >>>> struct hvm_intack intack) >>>> vmcb, general1_intercepts | GENERAL1_INTERCEPT_VINTR); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +/* SAF-1-safe */ >>>> void svm_intr_assist(void) >>>> { >>>> struct vcpu *v = current; >>> >>> Linux has the concept of "asmlinkage" for functions interfacing C and >>> assembly. Was it considered to use that - even if expanding to >>> nothing >>> for all present architectures - as a way to annotate affected >>> definitions >>> in place of the SAF-*-safe comments? >> >> It was proposed by Julien a while ago (I think it the thread on >> deviations.rst) to define >> a macro asmcall that expands to nothing, to mark all such functions. >> Right now, it's not >> strictly necessary (given that there are already some uses of SAF in >> Stefano's for-4.19 branch. > > Can this then be revisited please before any such reaches staging? > > Jan I'll let Stefano answer this one. -- Nicola Vetrini, BSc Software Engineer, BUGSENG srl (https://bugseng.com)