[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v1 5/8] xen/riscv: introduce identity mapping
- To: Oleksii <oleksii.kurochko@xxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 13:38:01 +0200
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=fl+a/GhPZFGdxHdvP5QAkd9hX/pxiNOFfITf5iaNXKE=; b=Q4w2+Y65fG3PssjzSwY3/aO8yCYfq0Zscx6V6vZjIZWx3Hgm5ss8etz6q6RxOrTUlhHlr3YSyJJ+cX35ScG4r6j1t8BVM2fW0kSMgbde71VBjsRMCvevD2kiPfWddYIt2XsT/LRc7v89CH4RWzktlaPfklVFjf6II2yMU/CXhddSu7MbSsmbM90dbr1sAcCYIrnpydNb8dNvDD8cm4UQ3JFzHhYwDtK9ulrRwTsTMNja7AaM2bYHxrAf5lfgXNFTjqZjmH+6g/YmVC4zRXGeBGeq5DwFI1jkjnMvpjlyxHx4cpl/L6wc/wHyMPj4O5a/bKhJN4gy9ZSrZG0Qm6vYpQ==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=Oosbj4+mpDCK2yuHxSN68GDqUPg/68y7V6JXs6y0f4Ot/9xuIDCo7861rZLdwQ4VH2SUclLoI+91StcvpbnuzWbEWsjVkkxlGoqJqHOsraND1FBuQkLfcXVKJPjf/rgxepX+dcDsJ+Tj5FTPKzTtWaxaCdCcVJbpctgG8pMeSGw/iq+FHHhhRBh6Pdt6CkZb3jdc5KNpWab3X0v98vS1GaV+wlpb7Bzc054iyqTQfTj69Vm7Ev7E7tfTUvPKpZRHZwqRnSoXXHJZ/ouy7kvbVfikebIF5lNKAi7wZsUrTW1mNJ9d3FknTn/wCCnk4Ooq/POYYVPLDuvlXXU2noctOA==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Bob Eshleman <bobbyeshleman@xxxxxxxxx>, Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@xxxxxxx>, Connor Davis <connojdavis@xxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 11:38:48 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 14.06.2023 13:06, Oleksii wrote:
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +void __init remove_identity_mapping(void)
>>> +{
>>> + int i, j;
>>
>> Nit: unsigned int please.
>>
>>
> It should be int in the current case because of the 'for' exit
> condition:
> for ( pgtbl = stage1_pgtbl_root, i = CONFIG_PAGING_LEVELS - 1; i
>> = 0; i-- )
>
> Should exit condition be re-writen?
Since it easily can be, I think that would be preferable. But in a case
like this, if you think it's better the way you have it, so be it (until
someone comes along and changes it).
Jan
|
