[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH 2/7] xen/arm: Wrap shared memory mapping code in one function
On 07/05/2024 15:57, Luca Fancellu wrote: > > > Hi Michal, > >>> >>> +static int __init handle_shared_mem_bank(struct domain *d, paddr_t gbase, >>> + bool owner_dom_io, >>> + const char *role_str, >>> + const struct membank *shm_bank) >>> +{ >>> + paddr_t pbase, psize; >>> + int ret; >>> + >>> + BUG_ON(!shm_bank); >> not needed >> >>> + >>> + pbase = shm_bank->start; >>> + psize = shm_bank->size; >> please add empty line here > > Will do >>> >>> int __init process_shm(struct domain *d, struct kernel_info *kinfo, >>> const struct dt_device_node *node) >>> { >>> @@ -249,32 +290,10 @@ int __init process_shm(struct domain *d, struct >>> kernel_info *kinfo, >>> if ( dt_property_read_string(shm_node, "role", &role_str) == 0 ) >>> owner_dom_io = false; >> Looking at owner_dom_io, why don't you move parsing role and setting >> owner_dom_io accordingly to handle_shared_mem_bank()? > > I think I wanted to keep all dt_* functions on the same level inside > process_shm, otherwise yes, I could > pass down shm_node and do the reading of role_str in handle_shared_mem_bank, > or I could derive > owner_dom_io from role_str being passed or not, something like: > > role_str = NULL; > dt_property_read_string(shm_node, "role", &role_str) > > [inside handle_shared_mem_bank]: > If ( role_str ) > owner_dom_io = false; > > And pass only role_str to handle_shared_mem_bank. > > Is this comment to reduce the number of parameters passed? I guess it’s not > for where we call In this series as well as the previous one you limit the number of arguments passed to quite a few functions. So naturally I would expect it to be done here as well. owner_dom_io is used only by handle_shared_mem_bank, so it makes more sense to move parsing to this function so that it is self-contained. ~Michal
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |