On 04/11/15 16:50, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH 4/4] xen/public: arm: rework the macro
> set_xen_guest_handle_raw"):
>> All quite interesting, but pretty moot with there not being any
>> get_xen_guest_handle() anymore.
>
> If we don't provide a get_xen_guest_handle, a kernel developer will be
> sorely tempted to make one.
>
> If they do and they write it in the obvious way, then the compiler
> could `deduce' that the top part of the uint64_t store was dead, and
> eliminate it.
The developers could also decide to rewrite the
set_xen_raw_guest_handle/get_xen_guest_handle in an obvious way because
they think ours it's too complicate... See the Linux version.
TBH, we can't protect ourself for a developer writing it own macro and
don't think about the big picture. The comment in the header pretty much
explain the constraint. If it doesn't read, well it's not our business.
Regards,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
