Re: [PATCH v5 25/44] x86/boot: convert create_dom0 to use boot info

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 10.10.2024 01:02, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
> On 10/8/24 12:52, Jason Andryuk wrote:
>> On 2024-10-06 17:49, Daniel P. Smith wrote:
>>> This commit changes create_dom0 to no longer take the individual 
>>> components and
>>> take struct boot_info instead. Internally, it is changed to locate the 
>>> kernel
>>> and ramdisk details from struct boot_info.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Smith <dpsmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>   xen/arch/x86/setup.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++---------
>>>   1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
>>> index 0d2ee19998aa..c2bcddc50990 100644
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/setup.c
>>> @@ -946,10 +946,8 @@ static unsigned int __init copy_bios_e820(struct 
>>> e820entry *map, unsigned int li
>>>       return n;
>>>   }
>>> -static struct domain *__init create_dom0(const module_t *image,
>>> -                                         unsigned long headroom,
>>> -                                         module_t *initrd, const char 
>>> *kextra,
>>> -                                         const char *loader)
>>> +static struct domain *__init create_dom0(const struct boot_info *bi,
>>> +                                         const char *kextra)
>>>   {
>>>       static char __initdata cmdline[MAX_GUEST_CMDLINE];
>>> @@ -964,9 +962,21 @@ static struct domain *__init create_dom0(const 
>>> module_t *image,
>>>               .misc_flags = opt_dom0_msr_relaxed ? XEN_X86_MSR_RELAXED 
>>> : 0,
>>>           },
>>>       };
>>> +    int headroom, mod_idx = first_boot_module_index(bi, 
>>> BOOTMOD_RAMDISK);
>>
>> I think headroom should stay unsigned long, which matches struct 
>> boot_module.
> 
> Yes, that was not intentional. Will preserve the size.

And just to mention, with what was said on another patch mod_idx also
shouldn't be plain int.

Jan