Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 22 Nov 2019 00:53:12 +0000
From:   Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
To:     Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, stefan@agner.ch,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>, sstabellini@kernel.org,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org,
        Vladimir Murzin <vladimir.murzin@arm.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>, alexios.zavras@intel.com,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, allison@lohutok.net,
        jgross@suse.com, steve.capper@arm.com,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, info@metux.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm/arm64/xen: use C inlines for privcmd_call
Message-ID: <20191122005311.GI25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
References: <20191121184805.414758-1-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
 <20191121184805.414758-2-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
 <20191122002258.GD25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
 <CA+CK2bDtADA2eVwJAUEPhpic8vXWegh8yLjo6Q6WmXZDxAfJpA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191122003403.GG25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
 <20191122003524.GH25745@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
 <CA+CK2bAm0r8zLMz_gdq30zF8io5RzVnbXFSV9NkyT_uUxKJwLA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+CK2bAm0r8zLMz_gdq30zF8io5RzVnbXFSV9NkyT_uUxKJwLA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 07:39:22PM -0500, Pavel Tatashin wrote:
> > > That may be, but be very careful that you only use them in ARMv7-only
> > > code.  Using them elsewhere is unsafe as the domain register is used
> > > for other purposes, and merely blatting over it (as your
> > > uaccess_enable and uaccess_disable functions do) is unsafe.
> >
> > In fact, I'll turn that into a bit more than a suggestion.  I'll make
> > it a NAK on adding them to 32-bit ARM.
> >
> 
> That's fine, and I also did not want to change ARM 32-bit. But, do you
> have a suggestion how differentiate between arm64 and arm in
> include/xen/arm/hypercall.h without ugly ifdefs?

Sorry, I don't.

I'm surprised ARM64 doesn't have anything like that, but I suspect
that's because they don't need to do a save/restore type operation.
Whereas, 32-bit ARM does very much need the save/restore behaviour
(although not in this path.)

The problem is, turning uaccess_enable/disable into C code means
that it's open to being used elsewhere in the kernel (ooh, a couple
of useful looking functions that work on both architectures!  I can
use that too!) and then we end up with stuff breaking subtly.  It's
the potential for subtle breakage that is making me NAK the idea of
adding the inline C functions.

Given the two have diverged, the only answer is ifdefs, sorry.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up