On 29/11/2019 15:05, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi, > > On 27/11/2019 18:44, Pavel Tatashin wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h >> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h >> index 3522cbaed316..1a74fb28607f 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/xen/hypercall.h >> @@ -1 +1,29 @@ >> +#ifndef _ASM_ARM64_XEN_HYPERCALL_H >> +#define _ASM_ARM64_XEN_HYPERCALL_H >> #include <xen/arm/hypercall.h> >> +#include <linux/uaccess.h> >> + >> +static inline long privcmd_call(unsigned int call, unsigned long a1, >> + unsigned long a2, unsigned long a3, >> + unsigned long a4, unsigned long a5) > > I realize that privcmd_call is the only hypercall using Software PAN > at the moment. However, dm_op needs the same as hypercall will be > issued from userspace as well.
And dm_op() won't be the only example as we continue in cleaning up the gaping hole that is privcmd. > So I was wondering whether we should create a generic function (e.g. > do_xen_hypercall() or do_xen_user_hypercall()) to cover the two > hypercalls? Probably a good idea. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
