On Tue, Nov 22, 2022, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Tue, 2022-11-22 at 20:31 +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote: > How's something like this? I did start typing that comment in the > max_evtchn_port() function in xen.c but moved it over. > > Still not utterly convinced, as it's still somewhat circular — we now > define NR_CHANNELS as (32*32) with a big comment explaining *why* that > is, and the reason is basically "because that's the number of bits in > an array of uint32_t[32]". Agreed, probably not an improvement across the board. Consistency with how the non-compat code declares the fields is also valuable, so unless someone changes upstream Xen code, let's just leave things as-is.
