Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 07/17] x86/hvm: add length to mmio check op

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 24.06.15 at 15:14, <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xen-devel-
>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich
>> Sent: 24 June 2015 14:08
>> >>> On 24.06.15 at 13:24, <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/io.h
>> > +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/io.h
>> > @@ -35,7 +35,9 @@ typedef int (*hvm_mmio_write_t)(struct vcpu *v,
>> >                                  unsigned long addr,
>> >                                  unsigned long length,
>> >                                  unsigned long val);
>> > -typedef int (*hvm_mmio_check_t)(struct vcpu *v, unsigned long addr);
>> > +typedef int (*hvm_mmio_check_t)(struct vcpu *v,
>> > +                                unsigned long addr,
>> > +                                unsigned long length);
>> 
>> I don't think this really needs to be "long"?
>> 
> 
> For consistency with the mmio read and write function types I went with 
> 'long'. Is there any harm in that?

Generally generates worse code (due to the need for the REX64
prefix on all involved instructions). Perhaps the other ones don't
need sizes/lengths passed as longs either?

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel