Re: [PATCH v3 12/12] xen/arm: List static shared memory regions as /memory nodes

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Luca,

On 22/04/2024 11:39, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> > On 22 Apr 2024, at 11:24, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 22/04/2024 10:26, Michal Orzel wrote:
> > > On 22/04/2024 10:07, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> > > > Hi Michal,
> > > >
> > > > > > +    for ( cells = reg, i = 0; cells < reg + nr_cells; i++, cells += reg_size )
> > > > > > +    {
> > > > > > +        u64 start = dt_read_number(cells, addrcells);
> > > > > We should no longer use Linux derived types like u64. Use uint64_t.
> > > > >
> > > > > > +        u64 size = dt_read_number(cells + addrcells, sizecells);
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +        dt_dprintk("  Bank %d: %#"PRIx64"->%#"PRIx64"\n",
> > > > > > +                   i, start, start + size);
> > > > > i is unsigned so the correct format specifier should be %u
> > > > Right, should have been more careful when copying the code from above
> > > >
> > > > > > +void __init shm_mem_node_fill_reg_range(const struct kernel_info *kinfo,
> > > > > > +                                        __be32 *reg, int *nr_cells,
> > > > > > +                                        int addrcells, int sizecells)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > +    const struct membanks *mem = &kinfo->shm_mem.common;
> > > > > > +    unsigned int i;
> > > > > > +    __be32 *cells;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +    BUG_ON(!nr_cells || !reg);
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +    cells = &reg[*nr_cells];
> > > > > > +    for ( i = 0; i < mem->nr_banks; i++ )
> > > > > > +    {
> > > > > > +        u64 start = mem->bank[i].start;
> > > > > ditto
> > > > Will fix, here paddr_t should be ok isn’t it?
> > > yes
> > > > > Rest LGTM:
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>
> > > > Thanks, I will send the next one shortly.
> > > I don't think there is a need to respin the whole series just for these fixes.
> > > You should wait for the committers opinion.
> > AFAICT, there are multiple changes requested in various line. So I would rather 
> > prefer if this is respinned.
> >
> > If this is the only patch that requires to change. You could send a new one in 
> > reply-to this patch. I think b4 is clever enough to pick up the new version in 
> > that case.
> All the other patches are already reviewed by Michal, if you agree with his review 
> it’s ok for me to respin only this one
I didn't review the patch in details. But I agree with his comments on it.

Cheers,

--
Julien Grall