From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751418AbdKUI3j (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 21 Nov 2017 03:29:39 -0500
Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:33408 "EHLO
        Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751100AbdKUI3i (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 21 Nov 2017 03:29:38 -0500
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 09:29:28 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bpetkov@suse.de>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/16] x86/fixmap: Generalize the GDT fixmap mechanism
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrXXJaqeCtzEarESTtmk19gf0bxfQ3DsWZJ_UrBg=ZUeqg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711210927450.1782@nanos>
References: <cover.1511195781.git.luto@kernel.org> <81302a25ec65f28660cba8d1d9d75b42c4c58939.1511195781.git.luto@kernel.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711202226120.2348@nanos> <CALCETrXXJaqeCtzEarESTtmk19gf0bxfQ3DsWZJ_UrBg=ZUeqg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 2:01 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 Nov 2017, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> + * to avoid circular header dependencies.
> >
> > :(
> 
> Hmm.  I could probably fix this, but it involves (at least) moving a
> struct definition and adding several new includes, and I'm not sure
> it'll actually converge to something  working.

Yeah, it's include hell. Looked at it and it's major churn.

> >> + */
> >> +struct cpu_entry_area
> >> +{
> >> +     char gdt[PAGE_SIZE];
> >> +};
> >> +
> >> +#define CPU_ENTRY_AREA_PAGES (sizeof(struct cpu_entry_area) / PAGE_SIZE)
> >
> >> +static inline unsigned int __get_cpu_entry_area_page_index(int cpu, int page)
> >> +{
> >> +     BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct cpu_entry_area) % PAGE_SIZE != 0);
> >> +
> >> +     return FIX_CPU_ENTRY_AREA_BOTTOM - cpu*CPU_ENTRY_AREA_PAGES - page;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +#define __get_cpu_entry_area_offset_index(cpu, offset) ({            \
> >> +     BUILD_BUG_ON(offset % PAGE_SIZE != 0);                          \
> >> +     __get_cpu_entry_area_page_index(cpu, offset / PAGE_SIZE);       \
> >> +     })
> >> +
> >> +#define get_cpu_entry_area_index(cpu, field)                         \
> >> +     __get_cpu_entry_area_offset_index((cpu), offsetof(struct cpu_entry_area, field))
> >
> > Any reason why those need to be macros?
> 
> The former is a macro because I doubt that BUILD_BUG_ON is valid in
> that context in a function.

Fair enough.

> The latter is a macro because 'field' is a name, not a value.

Bah. right. 

Thanks,

	tglx