Re: [PATCH 01/10] x86 setup: move x86 boot module counting into a new boot_info struct

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

(You might want to check your email settings because it looks like you
sent an html email)

On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Christopher Clark wrote:
>       > +struct boot_info {
> 
>       This is what we call struct bootmodules on ARM right? Would it help if
>       we used the same name?
> 
>       I am not asking to make the ARM code common because I think that would
>       probably be a lot more work.

This comment was wrong


> It becomes clearer to see by the end of the full hyperlaunch v1 series with 
> the domain builder implemented, but it is also evident by the
> end of this series: the core/common boot info for Xen is more than just a set 
> of bootmodules. This first patch is part of adding
> functionality to common incrementally, as a starting point, and reducing this 
> boot info to just a bootmodules structure is going to be
> limiting it in this context.

After having read the whole series, it is clear that you made such a
fantastic progress toward unifying all the interfaces, both ARM and x86.
You managed to introduce interfaces so similar to the existing ARM
interfaces, that they are almost the same already. This is way better
than I expected when I wrote that comment to the first patch.

I think we should go the extra mile and move the ARM interfaces to
common, and make any changes needed by x86 there in common and
reflecting the changes back to ARM.

This will also allow us to move more dom0less init code from ARM to
common with fewer changes later on.