Re: [PATCH v4 4/6] hw/arm/virt: Introduce virt_get_high_memmap_enabled() helper

[Cornelia Huck]

On Tue, Oct 04 2022, Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com> wrote:

> This introduces virt_get_high_memmap_enabled() helper, which returns
> the pointer to vms->highmem_{redists, ecam, mmio}. The pointer will
> be used in the subsequent patches.
>
> No functional change intended.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
> ---
>  hw/arm/virt.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/arm/virt.c b/hw/arm/virt.c
> index b0b679d1f4..59de7b78b5 100644
> --- a/hw/arm/virt.c
> +++ b/hw/arm/virt.c
> @@ -1689,14 +1689,29 @@ static uint64_t virt_cpu_mp_affinity(VirtMachineState 
> *vms, int idx)
>      return arm_cpu_mp_affinity(idx, clustersz);
>  }
>  
> +static inline bool *virt_get_high_memmap_enabled(VirtMachineState *vms,
> +                                                 int index)
> +{
> +    bool *enabled_array[] = {
> +        &vms->highmem_redists,
> +        &vms->highmem_ecam,
> +        &vms->highmem_mmio,
> +    };
> +
> +    assert(index - VIRT_LOWMEMMAP_LAST < ARRAY_SIZE(enabled_array));

I wonder whether we want an assert(ARRAY_SIZE(extended_memmap) ==
ARRAY_SIZE(enabled_array))? IIUC, we never want those two to get out of
sync?

> +
> +    return enabled_array[index - VIRT_LOWMEMMAP_LAST];
> +}
> +