On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, Rasmus Villemoes wrote: > On 02/04/2019 17.48, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Tue, 2 Apr 2019, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 12:19:46PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >>> +/* > >>> + * Array of exception stack page descriptors. If the stack is larger than > >>> + * PAGE_SIZE, all pages covering a particular stack will have the same > >>> + * info. > >>> + */ > >>> +static const struct estack_pages estack_pages[ESTACK_PAGES] > >>> ____cacheline_aligned = { > >>> + [CONDRANGE(DF)] = ESTACK_PAGE(DOUBLEFAULT_IST, DF), > >>> + [CONDRANGE(NMI)] = ESTACK_PAGE(NMI_IST, NMI), > >>> + [PAGERANGE(DB)] = ESTACK_PAGE(DEBUG_IST, DB), > >>> + [CONDRANGE(MCE)] = ESTACK_PAGE(MCE_IST, MCE), > >> > >> It would be nice if the *_IST macro naming aligned with the struct > >> cea_exception_stacks field naming. Then you could just do, e.g. > >> ESTACKPAGE(DF). > > > > Yes, lemme fix that up. > > > >> Also it's a bit unfortunate that some of the stack size knowledge is > >> hard-coded here, i.e #DB always being > 1 page and non-#DB being > >> sometimes 1 page. > > > > The problem is that there is no way to make this macro maze conditional on > > sizeof(). But my macro foo is rusty. > > Eh, but why do you need the CONDRANGE thing at all? [5 ... 5] is a > perfectly fine designator, equivalent to [5]. So you can just use > PAGERANGE in all cases, no?
Indeed. I tried that before and at some point GCC barfed, but probably due to some other slipup. The macro expansion error messages are soo helpful... Thanks, tglx