[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86/shadow: Don't use signed bitfield in sh_emulate_ctxt
- To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Bertrand Marquis <Bertrand.Marquis@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 9 May 2022 12:40:36 +0000
- Accept-language: en-GB, en-US
- Arc-authentication-results: i=2; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass (sender ip is 63.35.35.123) smtp.rcpttodomain=lists.xenproject.org smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dmarc=pass (p=none sp=none pct=100) action=none header.from=arm.com; dkim=pass (signature was verified) header.d=armh.onmicrosoft.com; arc=pass (0 oda=1 ltdi=1 spf=[1,1,smtp.mailfrom=arm.com] dkim=[1,1,header.d=arm.com] dmarc=[1,1,header.from=arm.com])
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=arm.com; dkim=pass header.d=arm.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=xp2I61m9Euis7KFkFoxjtRVQDm4E+k2+RKCuqZHlTXI=; b=C0JGkslR1RjHOPyz6AoFcZzzCaKUTzfWgK5o6R9/RYaMFsASOsXuwJdeQ4XXtUSdU/UXb11HdqjLpQivwO39mOcYsykN8ZmDzOiozrWB7brCn6jQwpD3WsWqe9XyFjckyrvB7PaXaAQnR6hKKEhoJtf0OgV7nZqqngTN/CJkQDHtxpPJ1CQrrVY3Z1hBnGZs+MMFwqta+CIuUDqQEe2LnKzuc5XCeekSPNnHSs5fw4x3K/PjO2cRacymXk+FSLR511+HsJ0DFj/uxHxGgACZbRupjgLFhiFGLNCQc3T/lShN5iU/jIFuKgRyj5ABCphgYRTm6jqK0LjSB+oQteY97Q==
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=xp2I61m9Euis7KFkFoxjtRVQDm4E+k2+RKCuqZHlTXI=; b=IfbuLuTAUyxXLPV9jwetLLmn4DHD1Gq5q4JgHbr8edXYG/fDY+HyegfzigaA98IYUrTNEexVL2HnMq4vrLutrYhZQncFC8aBcawMud2Yv22BJb0DJ3APaBXn7FBW0LsgTaJzkTi0bYKHEaJxaU/U1vslhdr8C5cFY57Dc3W5nWtu5xvLt/9Gk22sAL6ap4aV6QpsD/X6SJsvNF8qijAVWgbRG4eilm8GyeD5oiNlSuEqYKc5VVDRkWo2SONPDvYUhOcE9n1nF0cjlsjUgVQ9qYd4e56XLCDoxl0JLCed1OebTBKAwbB85RUbEcKi9+YBErDyRhUuCWPmsqNkH2ouHQ==
- Arc-seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=pass; b=neqWhOWh4YVFDay/iyWb6YMr8ElK62YSGWeq93gmXshjsl63lEMoM3ZitxOBRz0krcF20ES48zCA+KE5faNCQfvlZhd6jgTF4Crcujq0HWj1vhMlIUhWF+ZxF5kRCFGUWBRLfDWf9aTzgiIa9Dxe2jJ2bk38Gsiie9sxkdk9ADhlxevK2WI5zcXqDg6RNklveewVOSPbYYXYPlSVQMBdn0HjNzrvIeSz1om2qgotB15SjpF1RxIizMO+gwhkeVkY5PFCCe6Z6GrdS+k+F3Ljwv0GMRS+iZwVI5lbTrPiU79mp1+Hbd9E9dNo7/xc1TiW4nIl9oX05U6h5zcgUqZ6cg==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Kd/k1BWb62fFgP6GSTX7B3eH7QWlKo0Jn1ULUZD2AfaiRzDlNiSwLs3yxSNYx3ZERvTPM26+NSfPBCqsWoiAzm2kSowTP6CuqthGuUkRxcvIpLRUn1gd8EKQVMNAOL7oHt5KCi+PkiddR6i14u5aG1M3v9tharQn5r1W8zYlec6zxPb732ewGwneO0EnRKYtM1Z2mRzfyNECb4hKQobTQWydV02ZQR2blqvsjAhba27ymp4SS+1k1icLw3k37KOOfljxdGdzWtVimpMCrxjPDEkRe3X3LVwMMJ1XIeVnpzrk1JU3mFQttplr7UhfgP/sLo0JUbFGYtr+JoNG94tojg==
- Authentication-results-original: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
- Cc: Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@xxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 09 May 2022 12:41:06 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Nodisclaimer: true
- Original-authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
- Thread-index: AQHYY5/DJ7m5gzay0kyOU7fQ4wwz4q0WfLWA
- Thread-topic: [PATCH 2/3] x86/shadow: Don't use signed bitfield in sh_emulate_ctxt
Hi Andrew,
> On 9 May 2022, at 13:24, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> 'int' bitfields in particular have implementation defined behaviour under gcc
> and can change signed-ness with -funsigned-bitfields.
>
> There is no need for low_bit_was_clear to be a bitfield in the first place; it
> is only used as a boolean. Doing so even improves the code generation in
> sh_emulate_map_dest() to avoid emitting a merge with structure padding.
>
> Spotted by Eclair MISRA scanner.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@xxxxxxx>
Is in fact only used as boolean in hvm.c so does make sense.
Cheers
Bertrand
|
