From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 5/7] xen: arm: rewrite start of day page table and cpu bring up Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 18:09:58 +0100 Message-ID: <1379696998.8994.43.camel@hastur.hellion.org.uk> References: <1379381846.11304.73.camel@hastur.hellion.org.uk> <1379382050-11821-5-git-send-email-ian.campbell@citrix.com> <20130919113652.GF52431@ocelot.phlegethon.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130919113652.GF52431@ocelot.phlegethon.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Tim Deegan Cc: julien.grall@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Thu, 2013-09-19 at 12:36 +0100, Tim Deegan wrote: > > > - PRINT("- Ready -\r\n") > > +1: PRINT("- Ready -\r\n") > > Again, I'd prefer the label to go above (logically connected to the end > of the block being skipped) to avoid the risk of someone adding new code > just before '- Ready -' and having it be accidentally skipped. I've been half thinking about defining some macros: #define BOOT_CPU_START(name) cbnz x22, boot_cpu_#name_skip #define BOOT_CPU_END(name) boot_cpu_#name_skip: So we would end up with: BOOT_CPU_START(build_fixmap) /* All the stuff to build the fixmap */ BOOT_CPU_END(build_fixmap) I'm in two minds about whether this is an improvement though. Ian.