On Wed, 17 Apr 2024, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> On 17/04/2024 13:14, Michal Orzel wrote:
> > Commit afab29d0882f ("public: s/int/int32_t") replaced int with int32_t
> > in XEN_GUEST_HANDLE() in memory.h but there is no guest handle defined
> > for it. This results in a build failure. Example on Arm:
> >
> > ./include/public/arch-arm.h:205:41: error: unknown type name
> > ‘__guest_handle_64_int32_t’
> > 205 | #define __XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(name) __guest_handle_64_ ## name
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > ./include/public/arch-arm.h:206:41: note: in expansion of macro
> > ‘__XEN_GUEST_HANDLE’
> > 206 | #define XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(name) __XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(name)
> > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > ./include/public/memory.h:277:5: note: in expansion of macro
> > ‘XEN_GUEST_HANDLE’
> > 277 | XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(int32_t) errs;
> >
> > Fix it. Also, drop guest handle definition for int given no further use.
> >
> > Fixes: afab29d0882f ("public: s/int/int32_t")
> > Signed-off-by: Michal Orzel <michal.or...@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabell...@kernel.org>
> So it turned out that I committed v1 from Stefano. I was meant to commit the
> patch at all, but I think I started with a dirty staging :(. Sorry for that.
>
> I have reverted Stefano's commit for now so we can take the correct patch.
>
> Now, from my understanding, Andrew suggested on Matrix that this solution may
> actually be a good way to handle GUEST_HANLDEs (they were removed in v2).
> Maybe this can be folded in Stefano's patch?
v1 together with Michal's fix is correct. Also v2 alone is correct, or
v2 with Michal's fix is also correct.
My preference is v2 with Michal's fix, they can be committed as separate
patches. Also the others options are fine.
