[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86: replace __ASM_{CL,ST}AC

  • To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
  • From: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 10:12:40 +0200
  • Authentication-results: esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none
  • Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Delivery-date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 08:12:59 +0000
  • Ironport-sdr: aTKWflshIQYZiRGFowlSt8uYZHLOxGIFHVqPkTgbEUeY+d3imjLlTXY30yyXRe4XQ6PzRuNy4t H4N7Rr+bgVtqyPVEcJ2CmvItFwmC/jdKykQQaNd5jjdeIKxi2Pi2Qgx6ZzbgUNoEtgzkPVc1Xo 4swGR/UCLnC7Xno15vG4gC+nOM8JaXVxe6gna3a/7Fh8H/rpU2nsUxyVk9Y/WDFzXtxqwzckjN SFvPj98a4cTjnuyuurE96iqeQWhrbYEaJxD1Y4MMCHiOgUOLwd4aa4ZfAvkL4ijMajV4gHXKsv uhs=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 10:05:07AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 28.07.2020 11:06, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:47:52PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 27.07.2020 16:55, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 12:48:14PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/asm-defns.h
> >>>
> >>> Maybe this could be asm-insn.h or a different name? I find it
> >>> confusing to have asm-defns.h and an asm_defs.h.
> >>
> >> While indeed I anticipated a reply to this effect, I don't consider
> >> asm-insn.h or asm-macros.h suitable: We don't want to limit this
> >> header to a more narrow purpose than "all sorts of definition", I
> >> don't think. Hence I chose that name despite its similarity to the
> >> C header's one.
> > 
> > I think it's confusing, but I also think the whole magic we do with
> > asm includes is already confusing (me), so if you and Andrew agree
> > this is the best name I'm certainly fine with it. FWIW:
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Please quote the clac/stac instructions in order to match the other
> > usages of ALTERNATIVE.
> We're not consistently quoting when there's just a single word, see
> in particular spec_ctrl_asm.h. And thinking about it again I also
> don't see why we would want or need to enforce quotation when none
> is needed. Therefore both here and in patch 2 I'll keep (or make,
> when I touch a line anyway) things consistently unquoted where no
> quotes are needed. Please let me know if your R-b holds without the
> requested adjustment.

Yes, I'm fine as long as we are consistent with quoting of single word
instructions. Ideally I would like that we quote both single and multi
word for consistency, but you are the one doing the work so I'm not
going to oppose to not quoting single words.

Thanks, Roger.



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.