On 02/09/2024 11:16 am, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 29/08/2024 2:42 pm, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 1:07 PM Andrew Cooper <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>>> On 29/08/2024 12:52 pm, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/boot/defs.h b/xen/arch/x86/boot/defs.h
>>>> index 239b9f8716..ee1a4da6af 100644
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/boot/defs.h
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/boot/defs.h
>>>> @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ typedef u16 uint16_t;
>>>>  typedef u32 uint32_t;
>>>>  typedef u64 uint64_t;
>>>>
>>>> -#define U16_MAX              ((u16)(~0U))
>>>> +#define UINT16_MAX   ((uint16_t)(~0U))
>>>>  #define UINT_MAX     (~0U)
>>>>
>>>>  #endif /* __BOOT_DEFS_H__ */
>>> I'm happy with the change in principle, but could we see about dropping
>>> defs.h entirely?  For example, we've already got both of these UINT
>>> constants in types.h
>>>
>>> Since this was written, we've got rather better about cleaning up
>>> xen/types.h, and extracting macros into xen/macros.h
>>>
>>> I think there's a good chance that the regular headers can now be used
>>> directly, or with minor tweaking.
>>>
>> I tried, it gave a huge bunch of errors.
>> I think it can be done in a later follow-up.
> Ok fine.
>
> Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]>
>
> However, doesn't this mean we can drop the block of typedefs in the
> context above?  Happy to fold that in on commit.

Nope, that breaks differently.

I'll put the patch in as-is and cleanup can come later.

~Andrew

Reply via email to