Re: [PATCH v3 05/34] xen/riscv: introduce guest_atomics.h

[Oleksii <oleksii.kurochko@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 2024-01-11 at 16:57 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 22.12.2023 16:12, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Oleksii Kurochko <oleksii.kurochko@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Changes in V3:
> >  - update the commit message
> 
> There (still) is none - what is the above about?
Missed something. I'll double check during providing the next patch
version.
> 
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/include/asm/guest_atomics.h
> > @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
> > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
> > +#ifndef __ASM_RISCV_GUEST_ATOMICS_H
> > +#define __ASM_RISCV_GUEST_ATOMICS_H
> > +
> > +#define
> > guest_testop(name)                                                 
> > \
> > +static inline int guest_##name(struct domain *d, int nr, volatile
> > void *p)  \
> > +{                                                                 
> >           \
> > +    (void)
> > d;                                                               \
> > +    (void)
> > nr;                                                              \
> > +    (void)
> > p;                                                               \
> 
> What are these and ...
> 
> > +   
> > ASSERT_UNREACHABLE();                                              
> >      \
> > +                                                                  
> >           \
> > +    return
> > 0;                                                               \
> > +}
> > +
> > +#define
> > guest_bitop(name)                                                  
> > \
> > +static inline void guest_##name(struct domain *d, int nr, volatile
> > void *p) \
> > +{                                                                 
> >           \
> > +    (void)
> > d;                                                               \
> > +    (void)
> > nr;                                                              \
> > +    (void)
> > p;                                                               \
> 
> ... these about? If there's a reason for having them, then (nit)
> there
> are stray blanks.
It is only one reason for that to show that args are unused for time
being.
But I think I can drop these changes.


~ Oleksii