Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3] xen/arm: vsmc: Don't implement function ID that doesn't exist

[Volodymyr Babchuk <volodymyr_babchuk@xxxxxxxx>]

On 26.01.18 20:07, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 26/01/18 18:03, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
> > > diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/smccc.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/smccc.h
> > > index f543dea0bb..303517459f 100644
> > > --- a/xen/include/asm-arm/smccc.h
> > > +++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/smccc.h
> > > @@ -82,9 +82,23 @@ static inline uint32_t smccc_get_owner(register_t 
> > > funcid)
> > >   #define ARM_SMCCC_OWNER_TRUSTED_OS_END  63
> > >   /* List of generic function numbers */
> > > -#define ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_CALL_COUNT       0xFF00
> > > -#define ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_CALL_UID         0xFF01
> > > -#define ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_CALL_REVISION    0xFF03
> > So, I thing it is bette to leave
> > #define ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_CALL_*
> > and introduce
> I am ok to use FID, but I don't see any reason to keep ARM_SMCCC_FUNC_* 
> one around. No-one can use them directly in Xen and this would add 
> confusion.
Right. So you can nuke them.
Another idea is to leave only one definition and use it like this:

 ARM_SMCCC_FID_CALL(COUNT, HYPERVISOR)

This will reduce number of similar macro definitions. What do you think?

I'm okay with any variant.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel