[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v5 03/31] exec: Use uintptr_t for guest_base
From: |
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v5 03/31] exec: Use uintptr_t for guest_base |
Date: |
Wed, 3 Feb 2021 20:20:36 +0100 |
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 8:10 PM Richard Henderson
<richard.henderson@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 2/3/21 9:08 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > On 2/3/21 7:59 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> >> This is more descriptive than 'unsigned long'.
> >> No functional change, since these match on all linux+bsd hosts.
> >>
> >> Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
> >> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
> >> ---
> >> include/exec/cpu-all.h | 2 +-
> >> bsd-user/main.c | 4 ++--
> >> linux-user/elfload.c | 4 ++--
> >> linux-user/main.c | 4 ++--
> >> 4 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/exec/cpu-all.h b/include/exec/cpu-all.h
> >> index c23c77589b..c52180e8e6 100644
> >> --- a/include/exec/cpu-all.h
> >> +++ b/include/exec/cpu-all.h
> >> @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ static inline void tswap64s(uint64_t *s)
> >> /* On some host systems the guest address space is reserved on the host.
> >> * This allows the guest address space to be offset to a convenient
> >> location.
> >> */
> >> -extern unsigned long guest_base;
> >> +extern uintptr_t guest_base;
> >> extern bool have_guest_base;
> >> extern unsigned long reserved_va;
> >>
> >> diff --git a/bsd-user/main.c b/bsd-user/main.c
> >> index 65163e1396..c09d74d788 100644
> >> --- a/bsd-user/main.c
> >> +++ b/bsd-user/main.c
> >> @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@
> >>
> >> int singlestep;
> >> unsigned long mmap_min_addr;
> >> -unsigned long guest_base;
> >> +uintptr_t guest_base;
> >> bool have_guest_base;
> >> unsigned long reserved_va;
> >>
> >> @@ -965,7 +965,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> >> g_free(target_environ);
> >>
> >> if (qemu_loglevel_mask(CPU_LOG_PAGE)) {
> >> - qemu_log("guest_base 0x%lx\n", guest_base);
> >> + qemu_log("guest_base %p\n", (void *)guest_base);
> >
> > Why not use PRIxPTR?
>
> Didn't think of it. Worth a respin?
No, I was simply curious if it weren't possible for some reason.
> >
> > Otherwise:
> > Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
> >
>
- [PATCH v5 02/31] linux-user: Introduce PAGE_ANON, (continued)
- [PATCH v5 02/31] linux-user: Introduce PAGE_ANON, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 07/31] linux-user: Tidy VERIFY_READ/VERIFY_WRITE, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 08/31] bsd-user: Tidy VERIFY_READ/VERIFY_WRITE, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 10/31] linux-user: Fix guest_addr_valid vs reserved_va, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 13/31] linux-user: Explicitly untag memory management syscalls, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 03/31] exec: Use uintptr_t for guest_base, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 12/31] exec: Use cpu_untagged_addr in g2h; split out g2h_untagged, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 11/31] exec: Introduce cpu_untagged_addr, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 19/31] linux-user: Handle tags in lock_user/unlock_user, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 23/31] linux-user/aarch64: Implement PR_MTE_TCF and PR_MTE_TAG, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 04/31] exec: Use uintptr_t in cpu_ldst.h, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03
- [PATCH v5 09/31] linux-user: Do not use guest_addr_valid for h2g_valid, Richard Henderson, 2021/02/03