Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] x86: make PV hypercall entry points work with !CONFIG_PV

From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
	Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] x86: make PV hypercall entry points work with !CONFIG_PV
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 15:49:40 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e7474869-6ea1-691c-4eae-c2131b1527db@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181105154842.ka44hltutou2fdia@zion.uk.xensource.com>

On 05/11/18 15:48, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 08:04:37AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 02.11.18 at 16:55, <wei.liu2@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/traps.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/traps.c
>>> @@ -298,8 +298,21 @@ static unsigned int write_stub_trampoline(
>>>  }
>>>  
>>>  DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct stubs, stubs);
>>> +
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PV
>>>  void lstar_enter(void);
>>>  void cstar_enter(void);
>>> +#else
>>> +static inline void lstar_enter(void)
>>> +{
>>> +    panic("%s called", __func__);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static inline void cstar_enter(void)
>>> +{
>>> +    panic("%s called", __func__);
>>> +}
>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_PV */
>> Do we really need two separate stubs (and two separate string literals)
>> here?
> I think it is clearer if we have two distinct messages. But I'm not too
> fussed either way really. If you feel strongly about this, I'm happy to
> change it to only one function.

This is the correct way to do it.  __func__ will already be in the
string table, and the format string (being identical) will be merged.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel