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

[Oleksandr <olekstysh@gmail.com>]

On 07.10.21 23:42, Stefano Stabellini wrote:

Hi Stefano

> 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@epam.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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@epam.com>
>>>>> 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.

I got it, thank you for the explanation.


>
> 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.

Yes, agree.


-- 
Regards,

Oleksandr Tyshchenko