On 05/03/2024 20:24, Julien Grall wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jan,
>
> The title is quite confusing. I would have expected the macro...
>
> On 05/03/2024 08:33, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> There's no use of them anymore except in the definitions of the non-
>> underscore-prefixed aliases. Rename the inline functions, adjust the
>> virt_to_maddr() #define-e, and purge the (x86-only) maddr_to_virt() one,
>> thus eliminating a bogus cast which would have allowed the passing of a
>> pointer type variable into maddr_to_virt() to go silently.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
>>
>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/mm.h
>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/include/asm/mm.h
>> @@ -256,12 +256,12 @@ static inline void __iomem *ioremap_wc(p
>> /* Page-align address and convert to frame number format */
>> #define paddr_to_pfn_aligned(paddr) paddr_to_pfn(PAGE_ALIGN(paddr))
>>
>> -static inline paddr_t __virt_to_maddr(vaddr_t va)
>> +static inline paddr_t virt_to_maddr(vaddr_t va)
>> {
>> uint64_t par = va_to_par(va);
>> return (par & PADDR_MASK & PAGE_MASK) | (va & ~PAGE_MASK);
>> }
>> -#define virt_to_maddr(va) __virt_to_maddr((vaddr_t)(va))
>> +#define virt_to_maddr(va) virt_to_maddr((vaddr_t)(va))
>
> ... to be removed. But you keep it and just overload the name. I know it
> is not possible to remove the macro because some callers are using
> pointers (?). So I would rather prefer if we keep the name distinct on Arm.
>
> Let see what the other Arm maintainers think.
I share the same opinion. If it's about double underscores that violates MISRA
rule, I think
we deviated it the same way we deviated unique identifiers (IIRC).
~Michal
