[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v9 1/4] xen/arm: add generic SCI subsystem
- To: Oleksii Moisieiev <Oleksii_Moisieiev@xxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2025 10:55:03 +0100
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marquis@xxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>, Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Volodymyr Babchuk <Volodymyr_Babchuk@xxxxxxxx>, Grygorii Strashko <grygorii_strashko@xxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Tue, 09 Sep 2025 09:55:15 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
Hi Oleksii,
While going through the list of recently committed patches, I noticed
some changes in the relinquish code.
On 04/09/2025 15:21, Oleksii Moisieiev wrote:
@@ -1103,6 +1109,10 @@ int domain_relinquish_resources(struct domain *d)
ret = relinquish_p2m_mapping(d);
if ( ret )
return ret;
Style: There is a missing newline.
+ PROGRESS(sci):
I don't quite understand why the sci relinquish was added right in the
middle of the P2M relinquish logic. At least to me, it makes more sense
to be closer to TEE (because this is firmware subsystem) and possibly
even before releasing any devices.
Can you clarify why you chose this placement?
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
|
