Re: [PATCH V3 (resend) 07/19] xen/x86: Add support for the PMAP

[Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 12:26:29PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 14.05.2024 12:22, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 11:43:14AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 14.05.2024 11:40, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 01:40:34PM +0000, Elias El Yandouzi wrote:
> >>>> @@ -53,6 +55,8 @@ enum fixed_addresses {
> >>>>      FIX_PV_CONSOLE,
> >>>>      FIX_XEN_SHARED_INFO,
> >>>>  #endif /* CONFIG_XEN_GUEST */
> >>>> +    FIX_PMAP_BEGIN,
> >>>> +    FIX_PMAP_END = FIX_PMAP_BEGIN + NUM_FIX_PMAP,
> >>>
> >>> This would better have
> >>>
> >>> #ifdef CONFIG_HAS_PMAP
> >>>
> >>> guards?
> >>
> >> That's useful only when the option can actually be off in certain
> >> configurations, isn't it?
> > 
> > My comment earlier on this patch suggested to make CONFIG_HAS_PMAP be
> > selected by HAS_SECRET_HIDING, rather than being unconditionally
> > arch-selected (if that's possible, I certainly don't know the usage in
> > further patches).
> 
> Right, but in patch 6 HAS_SECRET_HIDING is selected unconditionally,
> which would then also select HAS_PMAP. If, otoh, HAS_PMAP was selected
> only when SECRET_HIDING (or whatever its name is going to be), then an
> #ifdef would indeed be wanted here.

Oh, indeed, I was meant to tie to SECRET_HIDING and not
HAS_SECRET_HIDING.  I have to admit (as I've already commented on the
patch) I don't much like those names, they are far too generic.

Thanks, Roger.