Re: [PATCH 2/7] xen/arm: Wrap shared memory mapping code in one function

[Luca Fancellu <Luca.Fancellu@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Michal,


>>>> 
>>>> 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.

Ok I will, just to be on the same page here, you mean having 
dt_property_read_string inside handle_shared_mem_bank?
Or the above example would work for you as well? That one would have role_str 
passed instead of shm_node.

Cheers,
Luca