Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] xen: Introduce "gpaddr_bits" field to XEN_SYSCTL_physinfo

[Oleksandr <olekstysh@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 01.10.21 10:50, Jan Beulich wrote:

Hi Jan

> On 01.10.2021 01:00, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Sep 2021, Oleksandr Tyshchenko wrote:
> > > From: Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@xxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > We need to pass info about maximum supported guest address
> > > space size to the toolstack on Arm in order to properly
> > > calculate the base and size of the extended region (safe range)
> > > for the guest. The extended region is unused address space which
> > > could be safely used by domain for foreign/grant mappings on Arm.
> > > The extended region itself will be handled by the subsequents
> > > patch.
> > >
> > > Use p2m_ipa_bits variable on Arm, the x86 equivalent is
> > > hap_paddr_bits.
> > >
> > > As we change the size of structure bump the interface version.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Julien Grall <jgrall@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@xxxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> I have to admit that I'm a little puzzled to see these R-b-s when ...
>
> > > Please note, that review comments for the RFC version [1] haven't been 
> > > addressed yet.
> > > It is not forgotten, some clarification is needed. It will be addressed for the 
> > > next version.
> > >
> > > [1] 
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/973f5344-aa10-3ad6-ff02-ad5f358ad279@xxxxxxxxxx/
> ... Oleksandr makes clear this patch isn't really ready yet.
Unfortunately, this is true. I am still waiting for the clarification [1]



> The tags
> could misguide a committer into putting in this series despite the
> open issue(s).
>
> Jan

[1] 
https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/6a2a183d-c9d8-df2a-41aa-b25283fab197@xxxxxxxxx/
--
Regards,

Oleksandr Tyshchenko