On 06/01/2020 15:34, Jan Beulich wrote: > --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/page.h > +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/page.h > @@ -55,6 +55,16 @@ > #define l4e_write(l4ep, l4e) \ > pte_write(&l4e_get_intpte(*(l4ep)), l4e_get_intpte(l4e)) > > +/* Type-correct ACCESS_ONCE() wrappers for PTE accesses. */ > +#define l1e_access_once(l1e) > (*container_of(&ACCESS_ONCE(l1e_get_intpte(l1e)), \ > + volatile l1_pgentry_t, l1)) > +#define l2e_access_once(l2e) > (*container_of(&ACCESS_ONCE(l2e_get_intpte(l2e)), \ > + volatile l2_pgentry_t, l2)) > +#define l3e_access_once(l3e) > (*container_of(&ACCESS_ONCE(l3e_get_intpte(l3e)), \ > + volatile l3_pgentry_t, l3)) > +#define l4e_access_once(l4e) > (*container_of(&ACCESS_ONCE(l4e_get_intpte(l4e)), \ > + volatile l4_pgentry_t, l4))
What's wrong with l?e_read_atomic() which already exist, and are already used elsewhere? If nothing, then Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> to save another round of posting. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
