From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A010CD4F3C for ; Tue, 19 May 2026 05:35:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Type:MIME-Version: Message-ID:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:From:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=5UKwXDW+7hb58mPBed45GUx0hIJvFOx7kJoYQzf+VD4=; b=sTKZsFFTAZBi0y5LIx/MGybIw8 ZC1DWXaGUGstfms+MIb4LLwiCorbmP9rmo7ZDaB7SrECmx+GkKF14Y2P9XbnhdwDKbepyKmIKQyhm 060dCwnwfV1MICchIxki5PvcFR7o+diAp3wDHeBHY/f+/f5q/XtueIRjStulAaMKeMXUKJlvhUtvB 0VOZDVeLfqPhPzaCehUkVMSrh/ij+S7e9qzuww5UZy0UIKhMdwOSZu/x4EppH1SWmErXdabz6DUfy 4dYYrsZ8SrnMx9Bvjogoixwd97a3SM3cn+m5OJ3s0khS10fW9/FWqxFjWDv7Ai8KJrQqXV/Vd8Uv6 U0uQmtnw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wPD7A-00000000Cxw-11mO; Tue, 19 May 2026 05:35:36 +0000 Received: from sea.source.kernel.org ([172.234.252.31]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wPD78-00000000CxX-0OOK for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 19 May 2026 05:35:35 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by sea.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67EB1405BD; Tue, 19 May 2026 05:35:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1908FC2BCB3; Tue, 19 May 2026 05:35:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1779168933; bh=rP9RzIPHI8dCnBjHtIv/y8xFe4w0kc8tSuhI6pYZh4E=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=TmPhvEP+EV1rsncpjT3wPHyPBm6X0H7DE38LSE7TRfUiD5uiNuDbbf7Z6GIY/J732 tZYU5Zrf3nKGmTdXvGkjcZcmPIRzURLUPo5iW/o3kWpNhrz9Imr6pqGQqKH02OT5bi GV94tpcX+G0ea47kVAEDqwuSbgGGThL2N9O02eY+CkNRCbfXyGSJx3JJdyZRcz8VQC 8BFrVXYCoeDYNgFTJtGTOr37P/2r7jd7JI6DvO8qdQ2liiPnOwnZZpdLRaZhUmvu71 bfbViwK+gz3rGm/kdTYVhKjKbSvqEvHnnUwjhnXGua5wLHunAkaiJn8z2X35XQP2pF G0npnvxEopUSw== X-Mailer: emacs 30.2 (via feedmail 11-beta-1 I) From: Aneesh Kumar K.V To: Steven Price , kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev Cc: Steven Price , Catalin Marinas , Marc Zyngier , Will Deacon , James Morse , Oliver Upton , Suzuki K Poulose , Zenghui Yu , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Joey Gouly , Alexandru Elisei , Christoffer Dall , Fuad Tabba , linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, Ganapatrao Kulkarni , Gavin Shan , Shanker Donthineni , Alper Gun , Emi Kisanuki , Vishal Annapurve , WeiLin.Chang@arm.com, Lorenzo.Pieralisi2@arm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 05/44] arm64: RMI: Add wrappers for RMI calls In-Reply-To: <20260513131757.116630-6-steven.price@arm.com> References: <20260513131757.116630-1-steven.price@arm.com> <20260513131757.116630-6-steven.price@arm.com> Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 11:05:22 +0530 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.9.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20260518_223534_152714_F9B8CDE0 X-CRM114-Status: UNSURE ( 9.17 ) X-CRM114-Notice: Please train this message. X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Steven Price writes: > The wrappers make the call sites easier to read and deal with the > boiler plate of handling the error codes from the RMM. > > Signed-off-by: Steven Price > +#define rmi_smccc(...) do { \ > + arm_smccc_1_1_invoke(__VA_ARGS__); \ > +} while (RMI_RETURN_STATUS(res.a0) == RMI_BUSY || \ > + RMI_RETURN_STATUS(res.a0) == RMI_BLOCKED) > + I guess this is not used. Also, that would require the call site to have a struct arm_smccc_res res. -aneesh