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=-6.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 F0D36C433E5 for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 13:59:43 +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 C016E2074F for ; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 13:59:43 +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="M/Tjz45N" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C016E2074F 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 1k0Q8h-00024T-Fv; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 13:59:31 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k0Q8h-00024O-3G for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 13:59:31 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 8e4abcaa-d0da-11ea-8b61-bc764e2007e4 Received: from esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (unknown [216.71.145.142]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 8e4abcaa-d0da-11ea-8b61-bc764e2007e4; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 13:59:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1595944771; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=v7TjwgpIipnilB9SKQprJ0BZzCL27UD9AeH4NyXe6m4=; b=M/Tjz45NOZlupJFcynPLNn2xkiX6rdoDdZPQ2L8jwhxsaWVWNE+18bTP hBuKSI2WoZuhPfVtDS8ZAv3z6QKEDKaeDWurkjtwpvK97YMMRlnS1s+vM 5Q1N+pouydrrq6y2xibBffSsNW2NDGSf7vmA/UBbXv+TbGJi1IjWeXdwx U=; Authentication-Results: esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none IronPort-SDR: EKu8ZImCF3nFbwNS64XopW8AVXuVnC+aBrx8EODBWfsnZeqQ6rmWePstkU8Mq5A4+2lGWXnR/v /5E4dZDquyd19hoLD2wwXUdl510KA48SXGBemrIGhFnuO4OYAmJwZ+CTxTlm8yJsspKfluaOTS I/m+FlUosxMtagHL4k19OlDfY5W3EjoD0kONvGOHS5vVugmAT1iwK6d6TP4VKzpyT7P+ViDML5 A9avXKv7Fd5llHcxMaEath0t8hXf/2Q3xhfXArPk1v8JO2/kTkf1EYUBPFWbEMgIfBCOPgC3ge F2Y= X-SBRS: 2.7 X-MesageID: 23685490 X-Ironport-Server: esa1.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,406,1589256000"; d="scan'208";a="23685490" Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86: replace __ASM_{CL,ST}AC To: Jan Beulich , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= References: <58b9211a-f6dd-85da-d0bd-c927ac537a5d@suse.com> <20200727145526.GR7191@Air-de-Roger> From: Andrew Cooper Message-ID: <868f864b-ae8e-0b01-8cf0-74a0fd3982ee@citrix.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 14:59:08 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB 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 Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On 27/07/2020 20:47, 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. Roger is correct.  Having asm-defns.h and asm_defs.h is too confusing, and there is already too much behind the scenes magic here. What is the anticipated end result, file wise, because that might highlight a better way forward. ~Andrew