> On 15 Nov 2024, at 12:00, Andrew Cooper <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 15/11/2024 10:50 am, Luca Fancellu wrote: >> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/xvmalloc.h b/xen/include/xen/xvmalloc.h >> index 440d85a284bb..802be6687085 100644 >> --- a/xen/include/xen/xvmalloc.h >> +++ b/xen/include/xen/xvmalloc.h >> @@ -40,20 +40,46 @@ >> ((typeof(ptr))_xvrealloc(ptr, offsetof(typeof(*(ptr)), field[nr]), \ >> __alignof__(typeof(*(ptr))))) >> >> +#if defined(CONFIG_HAS_VMAP) >> + >> /* Free any of the above. */ >> void xvfree(void *va); >> >> +/* Underlying functions */ >> +void *_xvmalloc(size_t size, unsigned int align); >> +void *_xvzalloc(size_t size, unsigned int align); >> +void *_xvrealloc(void *va, size_t size, unsigned int align); >> + >> +#else >> + >> +static inline void xvfree(void *va) >> +{ >> + xfree(va); >> +} >> + >> +void *_xvmalloc(size_t size, unsigned int align) >> +{ >> + return _xmalloc(size, align); >> +} >> + >> +void *_xvzalloc(size_t size, unsigned int align) >> +{ >> + return _xzalloc(size, align); >> +} >> + >> +void *_xvrealloc(void *va, size_t size, unsigned int align) >> +{ >> + return _xrealloc(va, size, align); >> +} >> + >> +#endif > > Does this really compile with the wrappers not being static inline ? > > That aside, could we not do this using conditional aliases, rather than > wrapping the functions? It would certainly be shorter, code wise.
Do you mean something like below? #define xvfree xfree #define _xvmalloc _xmalloc […] > > ~Andrew
