Updated VMWARE_BALLOON_CMD to use the common VMW_PORT macro.
Doing this rather than replacing all instances of VMWARE_BALLOON_CMD
to minimize code change.
Signed-off-by: Sinclair Yeh <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Hellstrom <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Alok N Kataria <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Xavier Deguillard <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
---
v1
Swapped parameters 1 and 2 to VMW_PORT because the macro has been
updated
---
drivers/misc/vmw_balloon.c | 29 ++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/misc/vmw_balloon.c b/drivers/misc/vmw_balloon.c
index ffb5634..f8f60ca 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/vmw_balloon.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/vmw_balloon.c
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
#include <linux/debugfs.h>
#include <linux/seq_file.h>
#include <asm/hypervisor.h>
+#include <asm/vmware.h>
MODULE_AUTHOR("VMware, Inc.");
MODULE_DESCRIPTION("VMware Memory Control (Balloon) Driver");
@@ -142,23 +143,17 @@ enum vmwballoon_capabilities {
#define VMW_BALLOON_SUCCESS_WITH_CAPABILITIES (0x03000000)
-#define VMWARE_BALLOON_CMD(cmd, data, result) \
-({ \
- unsigned long __status, __dummy1, __dummy2; \
- __asm__ __volatile__ ("inl %%dx" : \
- "=a"(__status), \
- "=c"(__dummy1), \
- "=d"(__dummy2), \
- "=b"(result) : \
- "0"(VMW_BALLOON_HV_MAGIC), \
- "1"(VMW_BALLOON_CMD_##cmd), \
- "2"(VMW_BALLOON_HV_PORT), \
- "3"(data) : \
- "memory"); \
- if (VMW_BALLOON_CMD_##cmd == VMW_BALLOON_CMD_START) \
- result = __dummy1; \
- result &= -1UL; \
- __status & -1UL; \
+#define VMWARE_BALLOON_CMD(cmd, data, result) \
+({ \
+ unsigned long __status, __dummy1, __dummy2; \
+ unsigned long __si = 0, __di = 0; \
+ VMW_PORT(VMW_BALLOON_CMD_##cmd, data, VMW_BALLOON_HV_PORT, \
+ VMW_BALLOON_HV_MAGIC, \
+ __status, result, __dummy1, __dummy2, __si, __di);\
+ if (VMW_BALLOON_CMD_##cmd == VMW_BALLOON_CMD_START) \
+ result = __dummy1; \
+ result &= -1UL; \
+ __status & -1UL; \
})
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
--
1.9.1
Hi,
Does any one know when this series will be applied?
Sinclair
On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 11:41:57AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 01:46:05PM -0800, Sinclair Yeh wrote:
> > Updated VMWARE_BALLOON_CMD to use the common VMW_PORT macro.
> > Doing this rather than replacing all instances of VMWARE_BALLOON_CMD
> > to minimize code change.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sinclair Yeh <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Thomas Hellstrom <[email protected]>
> > Reviewed-by: Alok N Kataria <[email protected]>
> > Acked-by: Xavier Deguillard <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Cc: Xavier Deguillard <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
>
>
> Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
>
> > -#define VMWARE_BALLOON_CMD(cmd, arg1, arg2, result) \
> > -({ \
> > - unsigned long __status, __dummy1, __dummy2, __dummy3; \
> > - __asm__ __volatile__ ("inl %%dx" : \
> > - "=a"(__status), \
> > - "=c"(__dummy1), \
> > - "=d"(__dummy2), \
> > - "=b"(result), \
> > - "=S" (__dummy3) : \
> > - "0"(VMW_BALLOON_HV_MAGIC), \
> > - "1"(VMW_BALLOON_CMD_##cmd), \
> > - "2"(VMW_BALLOON_HV_PORT), \
> > - "3"(arg1), \
> > - "4" (arg2) : \
> > - "memory"); \
> > - if (VMW_BALLOON_CMD_##cmd == VMW_BALLOON_CMD_START) \
> > - result = __dummy1; \
> > - result &= -1UL; \
> > - __status & -1UL; \
> > +#define VMWARE_BALLOON_CMD(cmd, arg1, arg2, result) \
> > +({ \
> > + unsigned long __status, __dummy1, __dummy2; \
> > + unsigned long __si, __di; \
> > + VMW_PORT(VMW_BALLOON_CMD_##cmd, arg1, arg2, 0, \
> > + VMW_BALLOON_HV_PORT, VMW_BALLOON_HV_MAGIC, \
> > + __status, result, __dummy1, __dummy2, __si, __di); \
> > + if (VMW_BALLOON_CMD_##cmd == VMW_BALLOON_CMD_START) \
> > + result = __dummy1; \
> > + result &= -1UL; \
> > + __status & -1UL; \
> > })
>
> Honestly, it doesn't look anymore "readable" to me, but it's your code
> to maintain, not mine... :)
>
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 07:39:53AM -0700, Sinclair Yeh wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does any one know when this series will be applied?
No idea, it's not going through my tree, as I don't have these in my
queue anymore...
greg k-h
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 09:30:37AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 07:39:53AM -0700, Sinclair Yeh wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Does any one know when this series will be applied?
>
> No idea, it's not going through my tree, as I don't have these in my
> queue anymore...
Ok, I'm not sure what else to do. I've already updated the series once
because it didn't get picked up last December. Can anyone on the x86 list
pick this up?
Sinclair