On Mon, 2024-06-24 at 10:04 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 24.06.2024 10:02, Oleksii wrote: > > On Fri, 2024-06-21 at 21:19 +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > > Hide the legacy __ro_after_init definition in xen/cache.h for > > > RISC-V, > > > to avoid > > > its use creeping in. Only mm.c needs adjusting as a consequence > > > > > > No functional change. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> > > > --- > > > CC: Shawn Anastasio <sanasta...@raptorengineering.com> > > > CC: Oleksii Kurochko <oleksii.kuroc...@gmail.com> > > > CC: George Dunlap <george.dun...@citrix.com> > > > CC: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > > > CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabell...@kernel.org> > > > CC: Julien Grall <jul...@xen.org> > > > > > > https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/andyhhp/xen/-/pipelines/1342686294 > > > --- > > > xen/arch/riscv/mm.c | 2 +- > > > xen/include/xen/cache.h | 2 ++ > > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/xen/arch/riscv/mm.c b/xen/arch/riscv/mm.c > > > index 053f043a3d2a..3ebaf6da01cc 100644 > > > --- a/xen/arch/riscv/mm.c > > > +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/mm.c > > > @@ -1,11 +1,11 @@ > > > /* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */ > > > > > > -#include <xen/cache.h> > > > #include <xen/compiler.h> > > > #include <xen/init.h> > > > #include <xen/kernel.h> > > > #include <xen/macros.h> > > > #include <xen/pfn.h> > > > +#include <xen/sections.h> > > > > > > #include <asm/early_printk.h> > > > #include <asm/csr.h> > > > diff --git a/xen/include/xen/cache.h b/xen/include/xen/cache.h > > > index 55456823c543..82a3ba38e3e7 100644 > > > --- a/xen/include/xen/cache.h > > > +++ b/xen/include/xen/cache.h > > > @@ -15,7 +15,9 @@ > > > #define __cacheline_aligned > > > __attribute__((__aligned__(SMP_CACHE_BYTES))) > > > #endif > > > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_ARM) || defined(CONFIG_X86) || > > > defined(CONFIG_PPC64) > > > /* TODO: Phase out the use of this via cache.h */ > > > #define __ro_after_init __section(".data.ro_after_init") > > > +#endif > > Why "defined(CONFIG_RISCV_64)" is missed? > > The TODO is being addressed by this patch for RISC-V. See how a > subsequent > patch also drops CONFIG_PPC64. Thanks for the explanation. Now it makes sense to me.
~ Oleksii
