On 8/10/20 12:39 AM, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 09.08.20 04:34, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On 8/7/20 4:38 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> @@ -377,10 +373,7 @@ static inline pte_t __pte(pteval_t val)
>>> {
>>> pteval_t ret;
>>> - if (sizeof(pteval_t) > sizeof(long))
>>> - ret = PVOP_CALLEE2(pteval_t, mmu.make_pte, val, (u64)val >>
>>> 32);
>>> - else
>>> - ret = PVOP_CALLEE1(pteval_t, mmu.make_pte, val);
>>> + ret = PVOP_CALLEE1(pteval_t, mmu.make_pte, val);
>>> return (pte_t) { .pte = ret };
>>
>>
>> Can this now simply return (pte_t) ret?
>
> I don't think so, but I can turn it into
>
> return native_make_pte(PVOP_CALLEE1(...));
I thought that since now this is only built for 64-bit we don't have to
worry about different pte_t definitions and can do what we do for
example, for __pgd()?
-boris
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
