Re: [PATCH V5 3/3] xen/arm: Updates for extended regions support

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 7 Oct 2021, Oleksandr wrote:
> On 07.10.21 23:06, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Oct 2021, Oleksandr wrote:
> > > On 07.10.21 04:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi Stefano
> > > 
> > > > On Wed, 6 Oct 2021, Oleksandr Tyshchenko wrote:
> > > > > From: Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is a follow-up of
> > > > > "b6fe410 xen/arm: Add handling of extended regions for Dom0"
> > > > > 
> > > > > Add various in-code comments, update Xen hypervisor device tree
> > > > > bindings text, change the log level for some prints and clarify
> > > > > format specifier, reuse dt_for_each_range() to avoid open-coding
> > > > > in find_memory_holes().
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@xxxxxxxx>
> > > > Thanks for the patch, it looks like you addressed all Julien's comments
> > > > well.
> > > I believe so)
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > > > @@ -1193,8 +1215,8 @@ static int __init make_hypervisor_node(struct
> > > > > domain
> > > > > *d,
> > > > >            u64 start = ext_regions->bank[i].start;
> > > > >            u64 size = ext_regions->bank[i].size;
> > > > >    -        dt_dprintk("Extended region %d: %#"PRIx64"->%#"PRIx64"\n",
> > > > > -                   i, start, start + size);
> > > > > +        printk("Extended region %d: %#"PRIx64"->%#"PRIx64"\n",
> > > > > +               i, start, start + size);
> > > > Also should be PRIpaddr
> > > I thought I needed to change specifier only for variables of type
> > > "paddr_t",
> > > but here "u64".
> > Sorry, you are right.
> > 
> > I added my reviewed-by and made the small typo changes on commit.
> 
> Thanks! In case if you haven't committed the patch yet, let's please wait for
> Julien (who asked for this follow-up) to review it.
> 
> In any case, I will be able to do another follow-up if needed.
 
I committed it as I would like to squeeze as many runs out of OSSTest
and Gitlab-CI as possible as we are getting closer and closer to the
release. I am trying to avoid the last minute rush to commit 150 patches
one day before code freeze :-)

The more intermediate runs we get, the easier is to pinpoint (and fix)
regressions.

But also, this patch doesn't affect external interfances, it is just
internal and mostly comments, so it is super-easy to do follow-ups.