[Crash-utility] Re: [PATCH] RISCV64: introduce riscv64_VTOP() and riscv64_PTOV()

Hi Austin, Sorry for the late reply.

On Wed, Apr 15, 2026 at 5:36 PM Austin Kim <austindh.kim(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > 2026년 4월 6일 (월) 오후 1:53, Austin Kim <austindh.kim(a)gmail.xn--com&gt;-4f21ay07k 작성: > > > > The VTOP and PTOV macros are typically implemented using architecture-specific > > functions to improve maintainability and debugging capabilities. > > > > This patch moves the RISCV64-specific VTOP/PTOV logic from inline macros > > in defs.h to dedicated functions in riscv64.c. This refactoring makes the > > code easier to understand and provides a better location for adding > > future debugging or validation checks. > > > > No functional changes are introduced by this patch. > > > > Signed-off-by: Austin Kim <austindh.kim(a)gmail.com&gt; > > --- > > defs.h | 14 ++++---------- > > riscv64.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/defs.h b/defs.h > > index a6f4372..54f1725 100644 > > --- a/defs.h > > +++ b/defs.h > > @@ -3803,16 +3803,8 @@ typedef signed int s32; > > /* > > * Direct memory mapping > > */ > > -#define PTOV(X) \ > > - (((unsigned long)(X)+(machdep->kvbase)) - machdep->machspec->phys_base) > > -#define VTOP(X) ({ \ > > - ulong _X = X; \ > > - (THIS_KERNEL_VERSION >= LINUX(5,13,0) && \ > > - (_X) >= machdep->machspec->kernel_link_addr) ? \ > > - ((unsigned long)(_X)-(machdep->machspec->va_kernel_pa_offset)): \ > > - (((unsigned long)(_X)-(machdep->kvbase)) + \ > > - machdep->machspec->phys_base); \ > > - }) > > +#define PTOV(X) riscv64_PTOV((ulong)(X)) > > +#define VTOP(X) riscv64_VTOP((ulong)(X)) > > #define PAGEBASE(X) (((ulong)(X)) & (ulong)machdep->pagemask) > > > > /* > > @@ -7211,6 +7203,8 @@ void riscv64_display_regs_from_elf_notes(int, FILE *); > > void riscv64_init(int); > > void riscv64_dump_machdep_table(ulong); > > int riscv64_IS_VMALLOC_ADDR(ulong); > > +ulong riscv64_PTOV(ulong); > > +ulong riscv64_VTOP(ulong); > > > > #define display_idt_table() \ > > error(FATAL, "-d option is not applicable to RISCV64 architecture\n") > > diff --git a/riscv64.c b/riscv64.c > > index eceae70..3aee827 100644 > > --- a/riscv64.c > > +++ b/riscv64.c > > @@ -1606,6 +1606,30 @@ riscv64_uvtop(struct task_context *tc, ulong uvaddr, physaddr_t *paddr, int verb > > } > > } > > > > +ulong riscv64_PTOV(ulong paddr) > > +{ > > + ulong vaddr; > > + ulong offset = paddr - machdep->machspec->phys_base; > > + > > + vaddr = offset + machdep->kvbase; > > + > > + return vaddr; > > +} > > + > > +ulong > > +riscv64_VTOP(ulong addr) > > +{ > > + ulong paddr; > > + > > + if ( (THIS_KERNEL_VERSION >= LINUX(5,13,0)) && > > + (addr >= machdep->machspec->kernel_link_addr)) > > + paddr = (addr - (machdep->machspec->va_kernel_pa_offset)); > > + else > > + paddr = (addr - (ulong)machdep->kvbase + machdep->machspec->phys_base); > > + > > + return paddr; > > +} > > Hello, > > Would you please give feedback on this patch? > > I think that VTOP() and PTOV() are architecture-specific functions. > For example, arm64_VTOP() and arm64_PTOV() are declared and used in arm64.c > > It would be good to have riscv64_VTOP() and riscv64_PTOV() in riscv64.c Agreed. The patch LGTM, so ack.