On 11.01.2018 15:01, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/01/2018 22:53, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>
>> +typedef uint64_t pgdval_t; /* Region-1 table entry */
>> +typedef uint64_t p4dval_t; /* Region-2 table entry*/
>> +typedef uint64_t pudval_t; /* Region-3 table Entry */
>> +typedef uint64_t pmdval_t; /* Segment table entry */
>> +typedef uint64_t pteval_t; /* Page table entry */
>> +
>> +typedef struct { pgdval_t pgd; } pgd_t;
>> +typedef struct { p4dval_t p4d; } p4d_t;
>> +typedef struct { pudval_t pud; } pud_t;
>> +typedef struct { pmdval_t pmd; } pmd_t;
>> +typedef struct { pteval_t pte; } pte_t;
>> +
>> +#define pgd_val(x) ((x).pgd)
>> +#define p4d_val(x) ((x).p4d)
>> +#define pud_val(x) ((x).pud)
>> +#define pmd_val(x) ((x).pmd)
>> +#define pte_val(x) ((x).pte)
>> +
>> +#define __pgd(x) ((pgd_t) { (x) } )
>> +#define __p4d(x) ((p4d_t) { (x) } )
>> +#define __pud(x) ((pud_t) { (x) } )
>> +#define __pmd(x) ((pmd_t) { (x) } )
>> +#define __pte(x) ((pte_t) { (x) } )
>> +
>
> You don't need to do this. Using recursive functions as in x86 is
> perfectly okay (just use pte_t as an opaque struct for type safety) if
> you prefer.
Okay, looking at kvm-unit-tests, I think you were talking about struct
pte_search and find_pte_level().
I'd prefer to keep it as is for now, closer to what we do in the kernel
(and might come in handy once we want to construct broken page tables to
test the virtual address translation in QEMU/KVM).
Thanks!
>
> Paolo
>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
