[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 11/16] xen/arm: calculate vgic irq rank based on register size
Hi Vijay, On 30/05/14 09:59, Vijay Kilari wrote: On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On 05/26/2014 11:26 AM, vijay.kilari@xxxxxxxxx wrote:- *r = ( (v->domain->max_vcpus<<5) & GICD_TYPE_CPUS ) - |( ((v->domain->arch.vgic.nr_lines/32)) & GICD_TYPE_LINES ); + *r = ( (v->domain->max_vcpus << 5) & GICD_TYPE_CPUS ) + |( ((v->domain->arch.vgic.nr_lines / 32)) & GICD_TYPE_LINES );Why these changes?Legacy coding style fixes. If you don't touch that part of the code, please don't do random coding style fix without any mention in the commit message. vgic_unlock(v); return 1; case GICD_IIDR: - if ( dabt.size != 2 ) goto bad_width; + if ( dabt.size != DABT_WORD ) goto bad_width; /* * XXX Do we need a JEP106 manufacturer ID? * Just use the physical h/w value for now @@ -119,8 +119,8 @@ static int vgic_distr_mmio_read(struct vcpu *v, mmio_info_t *info) goto read_as_zero; case GICD_ISENABLER ... GICD_ISENABLERN: - if ( dabt.size != 2 ) goto bad_width; - rank = vgic_irq_rank(v, 1, gicd_reg - GICD_ISENABLER); + if ( dabt.size != DABT_WORD ) goto bad_width; + rank = vgic_irq_rank(v, 1, gicd_reg - GICD_ISENABLER, DABT_WORD);In your commit message you explicitly say that use DABT_* will help you to get the register offset but... you still hardcode the size. Why can't you use dabt.size here? And all the other places.dabt.size gives the current register access size but not the actual register size. In this specific case, the register access size and the actual register size is the same... Regards, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |