From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6A3D42BC58; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 15:06:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784128017; cv=none; b=jNriJo1O/LfSOwwzthpGHsWcHmizie2lCsPB4IWw0k8QgUbI9vHMhVxrQ1HQwhpttErq21VAajghmDNbBBn+UxK9H/0YFcMriEfdgZ7mO92Q5GKpXFC2HAa45OWpfR9J1PPM8twOLcKzq7hBtzlA5zsTPceglaZk8Q0J+bw1pnw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1784128017; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TUZGVsbgQlqpPNw19QmZ4TpzXd38zHRHXwauyCE/oz4=; h=From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Date: Message-Id; b=WIbLa7ZqI+JWKvr6SJRdh+7Bz0P5prOLI8/QWJ7tcoyHiBKpNTKHnE+Tvh7zYccqeoRlGpUt8n48/Vskvjd4mrosZ5VMUo4CG29a/ygHUcrhQ+AfNNahZOhw7g6SSaqkr8S2MVt01sUMzaqtBeXMjCRGJ9pQghagpMs760bZp28= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=MQwrA61Y; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="MQwrA61Y" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4D0A61F00A3A; Wed, 15 Jul 2026 15:06:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1784128016; bh=8gNRNQSW6vsktM1lbk7lGhKHurw9QaFYDhPaWxlP0Cc=; h=From:Subject:Reply-To:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=MQwrA61Ykf0ssG5unhBw8veYKROdA1mQdlXY+yx9U6WOajRyL7xTsVfub5kEaP+eW /eals2r8UCuZjDKMGKKgfdyF3NuXFCpGofNIi4ZqzP4cXiBj8sMxnmZVBevTKBUYOJ J7rJwEnFCsxPP2RvfW3rSaNQRK+NN6BcDpmAvexlldJIXcoaSJfVyvXBpJduZ6YPlG 9NJspzKdHkoeiUwFQK+6rztLz8C+nd5zi6KUjyO4yCj35H4uATihIZrvNinHokfO4R QkSNurk+G36Ec30P7HrIhb4qH4WnDZfTKwD0CRHM+G8od7DThAbXRw/+wULqlhIwpI zhgfZXrc5kS3A== From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] firmware: arm_rmm: Check for RMI support at init Reply-To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev To: "Steven Price" Cc: "Marc Zyngier" , kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, "Oliver Upton" In-Reply-To: <20260715142739.80398-4-steven.price@arm.com> References: <20260715142739.80398-1-steven.price@arm.com> <20260715142739.80398-4-steven.price@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2026 15:06:55 +0000 Message-Id: <20260715150656.4D0A61F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: - [Low] The function `is_rmi_available()` is declared in the header but its= implementation is missing. -- --- Patch [3]: [PATCH 3/6] firmware: arm_rmm: Check for RMI support at init= --- commit 422535e6880c00ddffdc5f970e459e2cf571e957 Author: Steven Price firmware: arm_rmm: Check for RMI support at init Query the RMI version number and check if it is a compatible version. The first two feature registers are read and exposed for future code to use. > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_rmm/rmi.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_rmm/rm= i.c > new file mode 100644 > index 0000000000000..c4850976544ff > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_rmm/rmi.c [ ... ] > +static int __init arm64_init_rmi(void) > +{ > + int ret; > + > + /* Continue without realm support if we can't agree on a version */ > + ret =3D rmi_check_version(); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > + ret =3D rmi_read_features(); > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > + return 0; > +} > + > +/* > + * Note arm64_init_rmi() must be called before kvm_init_rmi() otherwise = KVM > + * will not support realm guests. subsys_initcall() is called before > + * module_init() (used for KVM) so this is OK. > + */ > +subsys_initcall(arm64_init_rmi); [Severity: Low] Is the implementation of is_rmi_available() missing here? It is declared for external callers in include/linux/arm-rmi-cmds.h: bool is_rmi_available(void); However, the corresponding definition appears to be missing from drivers/firmware/arm_rmm/rmi.c, which could lead to link-time undefined reference errors when another subsystem attempts to use it. --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260715142739.8039= 8-1-steven.price@arm.com?part=3D3