Re: [PATCH v3 4/7] x86/paravirt: remove 32-bit support from PARAVIRT_XXL

[Jürgen Groß]

On 10.08.20 18:53, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> 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()?

Yes, I did that:

 return (pte_t) { ret };


Juergen