Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] x86: adjustments to guest handle treatment

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Jan,

On 05/05/2020 07:26, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 22.04.2020 10:26, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 11:13:23AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > First of all avoid excessive conversions. copy_{from,to}_guest(), for
> > > example, work fine with all of XEN_GUEST_HANDLE{,_64,_PARAM}().
> > >
> > > Further
> > > - do_physdev_op_compat() didn't use the param form for its parameter,
> > > - {hap,shadow}_track_dirty_vram() wrongly used the param form,
> > > - compat processor Px logic failed to check compatibility of native and
> > >    compat structures not further converted.
> > >
> > > As this eliminates all users of guest_handle_from_param() and as there's
> > > no real need to allow for conversions in both directions, drop the
> > > macros as well.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> > > [...]
> > > --- a/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c
> > > +++ b/xen/drivers/acpi/pmstat.c
> > > @@ -492,7 +492,7 @@ int do_pm_op(struct xen_sysctl_pm_op *op
> > >       return ret;
> > >   }
> > >   
> > > -int acpi_set_pdc_bits(u32 acpi_id, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(uint32) pdc)
> > > +int acpi_set_pdc_bits(u32 acpi_id, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(uint32) pdc)
> > Nit: switch to uint32_t while there?
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Unless I hear objections, I'm intending to commit this then in a
> day or two with the suggested change made and the R-b given. Of
> course a formally required ack for the Arm side dropping of
> guest_handle_from_param() would still be nice ...
I missed the small change on Arm sorry:

Acked-by: Julien Grall <jgrall@xxxxxxxxxx>

Cheers,

--
Julien Grall