Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 00/15] arm64: Mediate access to GICv3 sysregs at EL2

[Manish Jaggi <mjaggi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 03/21/2018 02:15 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 03/21/2018 04:58 AM, Manish Jaggi wrote:
> > Hi Julien,
> >
> > On 03/20/2018 01:16 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > On 03/16/2018 11:58 AM, Manish Jaggi wrote:
> > > > This patchset is a Xen port of Marc's patchset.
> > > > arm64: KVM: Mediate access to GICv3 sysregs at EL2 [1]
> > > >
> > > > The current RFC patchset is a subset of [1], as it handleing only 
> > > > Group1 traps
> > > > as a PoC. Most of the trap code is added in vsysreg.c. Trap handler 
> > > > function is kept
> > > > independent of the usual guest trap handling code.
> > > > Looking for feedback on this approach.
> > > This cover letter does not seem to match the series. Please update 
> > > it on every time you send a series.
> > %s/vsysreg.c/vgic-v3-sr..
> >
> > Could you please review the other patches in the series, so that I 
> > can send v2.
> Here the major comments for the series (included patch not reviewed):
>     1) You seem to miss some patches from Linux. I would like to 
> understand why they are not there.
if code is ported to xen, it is perfectly fine to take only relevant 
patches.
For instance we are not providing any command line option to 
individually enable group1 grou0 traps.
>     2) Strangely some commits does not match the Linux one either in 
> order and content (I am not speaking about the changes required by 
> Xen). For instance this is the case of patch #14 "arm64: vgic-v3: Add 
> ICV_AP(0/1)Rn_EL1 handler". If you port commit from Linux, then you 
> should follow the same. This help a lot for review.
Since we are not doing individually enable of group0/1, it doesnt make 
sense to have two set of patches for ICV_AP0 / ICV_AP1. So I merged it.
>     3)
>
> Code organization:
>     1) Please drop __ from all functions
ok I will change.
>     2) All functions not exported *should* be static. At the same time 
> you need to make sure that the series are bisectable. So you probably 
> hook the file in the build system at the end rather than in #3.
ok.
> Cheers,

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