On 22/2/2022 4:33 pm, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 2/22/22 07:25, Like Xu wrote:
From: Like Xu <likexu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Fix the function address for __static_call_return0() which is used by
static_call_update() when a func in struct kvm_x86_ops is NULL.
Fixes: 5be2226f417d ("KVM: x86: allow defining return-0 static calls")
Signed-off-by: Like Xu <likexu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sorry for the stupid question, but what breaks?
Although they are numerically the same, I suppose we should use the
& operator here, as in the other cases where __static_call_return0 is used.
What's more, Clang complains about the KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0 change:
./arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h:108:1: warning: pointer type mismatch \
('bool (*)(struct kvm_vcpu *)' (aka '_Bool (*)(struct kvm_vcpu *)') and 'void *') \
[-Wpointer-type-mismatch]
and more warnings from [-Wpointer-type-mismatch]
Does it help you ?
Paolo
---
arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
index 713e08f62385..312f5ee19514 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
@@ -1548,7 +1548,7 @@ static inline void kvm_ops_static_call_update(void)
#define KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL __KVM_X86_OP
#define KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0(func) \
static_call_update(kvm_x86_##func, kvm_x86_ops.func ? : \
- (void *) __static_call_return0);
+ (void *)&__static_call_return0);
#include <asm/kvm-x86-ops.h>
#undef __KVM_X86_OP
}
