[PATCH v2 4/8] xen: Use the correctly the Xen memory terminologies

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Tue, 4 Aug 2015, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 08/04/2015 02:12 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
> >     /*
> >    * We detect special mappings in one of two ways:
> > @@ -217,9 +232,13 @@ static inline unsigned long bfn_to_local_pfn(unsigned
> > long mfn)
> >     /* VIRT <-> MACHINE conversion */
> >   #define virt_to_machine(v)	(phys_to_machine(XPADDR(__pa(v))))
> > -#define virt_to_pfn(v)          (PFN_DOWN(__pa(v)))
> >   #define virt_to_mfn(v)		(pfn_to_mfn(virt_to_pfn(v)))
> >   #define mfn_to_virt(m)		(__va(mfn_to_pfn(m) << PAGE_SHIFT))
> > +#define virt_to_pfn(v)          (PFN_DOWN(__pa(v)))
> 
> This looks like unnecessary change.
> 
> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/xen-fbfront.c
> > b/drivers/video/fbdev/xen-fbfront.c
> > index 09dc447..25e3cce 100644
> > --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/xen-fbfront.c
> > +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/xen-fbfront.c
> > @@ -539,7 +539,7 @@ static int xenfb_remove(struct xenbus_device *dev)
> >     static unsigned long vmalloc_to_mfn(void *address)
> >   {
> > -	return pfn_to_mfn(vmalloc_to_pfn(address));
> > +	return pfn_to_gfn(vmalloc_to_pfn(address));
> >   }
> 
> Are you sure? This will return vmalloc_to_pfn(address)).

I think that is OK: there is no behavioural change here.