Hi,
On 7/8/19 7:11 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 07/07/2019 19:42, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Andrew,
On 7/4/19 8:14 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
To allow for further improvements, it is useful to be able to clear
more than
a single flag at once. Rework gnttab_clear_flag() into
gnttab_clear_flags()
which takes a bitmask rather than a bit number.
No practical change yet.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>
---
CC: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
CC: Wei Liu <w...@xen.org>
CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com>
CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabell...@kernel.org>
CC: Julien Grall <julien.gr...@arm.com>
CC: George Dunlap <george.dun...@eu.citrix.com>
v2:
* Use unsigned int for the mask parameter
I don't seem to find the request on the ML. Technically the mask can
only be 16-bit. May I ask the reason of this change?
It is on the mailing list, but an orphaned email due to Jan's email changes.
Is it the same problem as I have seen the past 6 months between Juergen
and Jan's e-mail?
https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/1561109798-8744-5-git-send-email-andrew.coop...@citrix.com/T/#t
To be honest, I think it is wrong to try to micro-optimize a common
prototype for the benefit of one architecture and one compiler version
(or even none per the e-mail).
One could also argue that this may be not beneficial for the non-x86
architecture depending on how the compiler decide to do the cast from
32-bit to 16-bit...
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
