Re: [PATCH] x86/P2M: correct type use in p2m_put_gfn()

["Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>]

On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 03:01:27PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Everywhere else gfn_t are passed into respective GFN locking macros: Do so
> here as well.
> 
> Amends: 819cdc5a7301 ("x86/p2m: re-arrange {,__}put_gfn()")
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>

> ---
> Easy to spot by adding ASSERT(!gfn_eq(g, INVALID_GFN)) to the respective
> macros. While imo that should be a correct thing to do (as with
> hypothetical split locks a valid GFN would really need passing in, in
> order to be able to figure out which lock to use), we can't do so right
> now: The lock is acquired ahead of respective checking in a number of
> places, e.g. in p2m_get_gfn_type_access().

Could we convert those macros into static inlines?  It's dangerous to
use macros like those when the parameters are dropped, as the
parameter is not evaluated at all.

Thanks, Roger.