On 7/26/19 8:03 AM, tony.ngu...@bt.com wrote:
> On 7/25/19 9:45 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>On 7/25/19 11:52 AM, tony.ngu...@bt.com wrote:
>>> Replacing size with size+sign+endianness (MemOp) will enable us to
>>> collapse the two byte swaps, adjust_endianness and handle_bswap, along
>>> the I/O path.
>>>
>>> While interfaces are converted, callers will have existing unsigned
>>> size coerced into a MemOp, and the callee will use this MemOp as an
>>> unsigned size.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen <tony.ngu...@bt.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/exec/memop.h | 4 ++++
>>> include/exec/memory.h | 9 +++++----
>>> memory.c | 7 +++++--
>>> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/exec/memop.h b/include/exec/memop.h
>>> index ac58066..09c8d20 100644
>>> --- a/include/exec/memop.h
>>> +++ b/include/exec/memop.h
>>> @@ -106,4 +106,8 @@ typedef enum MemOp {
>>> MO_SSIZE = MO_SIZE | MO_SIGN,
>>> } MemOp;
>>>
>>> +/* No-op while memory_region_dispatch_[read|write] is converted to
> MemOp */
>>> +#define MEMOP_SIZE(op) (op) /* MemOp to size. */
>>> +#define SIZE_MEMOP(ul) (ul) /* Size to MemOp. */
>>
>>SIZE_MEMOP() is never used until patch #10 "memory: Access MemoryRegion
>>with MemOp semantics", it would be clearer to only introduce the
>>MEMOP_SIZE() no-op here, and directly introduce the correct SIZE_MEMOP()
>>macro in patch #10.
>
> SIZE_MEMOP() is used, and is the main change, in patches #3 to #10.
> Perhaps you
> meant MEMOP_SIZE()?
Eh, I inverted the macro names... :( Thanks for correcting me.
> Either way, you have raised an issue :)
>
> There is a lack of clarity in how the two macros are used to update the
> interfaces.
>
>
