| Message ID | 20220628125938.694256-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | ARM: efi: Simplify arch_efi_call_virt() macro by using typeof() | expand |
On Wed, 29 Jun 2022 at 10:57, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 07:58:38PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 16:09, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 03:57:38PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > > > On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 15:47, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote: > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > I am yet to figure out how asm/efi.h and linux/efi.h are included so that > > > > > we can have generic definition in linux/efi.h and x86 can undefine that > > > > > and redefine its own version. > > > > > > > > > > Does that make sense ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > I appreciate the effort, but for now, let's just fix the ones we need > > > > to fix (and the ARM one too while we're at it). PRM can only be > > > > enabled on x86 and arm64 anyway. > > > > > > True. OK then I will just update ARM version and leave loongarch as is. > > > > > > > Actually, this was rather straight-forward so I folded this change > > into your ARM patch. > > I see you have the generic version for all archs except arm64 and x86 as > we discussed earlier. Since you have even included the arm64 changes, the > PRMT enablement patches need to routed via your tree now as it depends on > the change you have in your -next. > > Are you OK with that if Rafael agrees ? I can ask him on the other thread. > No further changes are needed. Let me know. > Yes, that is fine. Or I can put that patch on a stable branch by itself.
diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/efi.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/efi.h index 27218eabbf9a..d4a405c9b4b6 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/efi.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/efi.h @@ -26,8 +26,7 @@ int efi_set_mapping_permissions(struct mm_struct *mm, efi_memory_desc_t *md); #define arch_efi_call_virt(p, f, args...) \ ({ \ - efi_##f##_t *__f; \ - __f = p->f; \ + typeof(p->f) __f = p->f; \ __f(args); \ })
Currently, the arch_efi_call_virt() assumes all users of it will have defined a type 'efi_##f##_t' to make use of it. It is unnecessarily forcing the users to create a new typedef when __efi_rt_asm_wrapper() actually expects void pointer. Simplify the arch_efi_call_virt() macro by using typeof(p->f) which must be a pointer as required by __efi_rt_asm_wrapper() and eliminate the explicit need for efi_##f##_t type for every user of this macro. This change is done to align with implementations on other similar architectures. Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org> Cc: Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> --- arch/arm/include/asm/efi.h | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) Hi, Reference for this change [1] and in particular[2] Regards, Sudeep [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220628125346.693304-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220628125346.693304-3-sudeep.holla@arm.com/