On 29.02.2024 16:27, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/irq.h > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/irq.h > @@ -179,9 +179,9 @@ void cleanup_domain_irq_mapping(struct domain *d); > void *__ret = radix_tree_lookup(&(d)->arch.hvm.emuirq_pirq, emuirq);\ > __ret ? radix_tree_ptr_to_int(__ret) : IRQ_UNBOUND; \ > }) > -#define IRQ_UNBOUND -1 > -#define IRQ_PT -2 > -#define IRQ_MSI_EMU -3 > +#define IRQ_UNBOUND (-1) > +#define IRQ_PT (-2) > +#define IRQ_MSI_EMU (-3) > > bool cpu_has_pending_apic_eoi(void); >
I'd be happy to ack this change right away. > --- a/xen/arch/x86/usercopy.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/usercopy.c > @@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ unsigned int copy_from_guest_ll(void *to, const void > __user *from, unsigned int > return n; > } > > -#if GUARD(1) + 0 > +#if GUARD((1)) + 0 I don't even understand the need for this one, and nothing is said in the description in that regard. Generally I'm afraid I'm averse to such (seemingly) redundant parentheses in macro invocations. Jan
