From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@arm.com>
Cc: bertrand.marquis@arm.com, wei.chen@arm.com,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com>,
Ian Jackson <iwj@xenproject.org>, Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>, Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] docs/doxygen: doxygen documentation for grant_table.h
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2021 13:05:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c8e1022f-abb0-56f3-db37-5cec4d01dead@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210419091231.55684-4-luca.fancellu@arm.com>
On 19.04.2021 11:12, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> Modification to include/public/grant_table.h:
>
> 1) Add doxygen tags to:
> - Create Grant tables section
> - include variables in the generated documentation
> 2) Add .rst file for grant table for Arm64
I'm missing some reasoning about at least some of the changes done
to grant_table.h. Looking at this and the earlier patches I also
couldn't spot any general outline of what is acceptable or even
necessary in such a header to be understood by doxygen. Without
this written down somewhere (or, if documented elsewhere, a
pointer provided to that doc) I'm afraid things might get screwed
up again later on.
> --- a/docs/hypercall-interfaces/arm64.rst
> +++ b/docs/hypercall-interfaces/arm64.rst
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ Starting points
> .. toctree::
> :maxdepth: 2
>
> + arm64/grant_tables
>
>
> Functions
> diff --git a/docs/hypercall-interfaces/arm64/grant_tables.rst b/docs/hypercall-interfaces/arm64/grant_tables.rst
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..8955ec5812
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/docs/hypercall-interfaces/arm64/grant_tables.rst
> @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-4.0
> +
> +Grant Tables
> +============
> +
> +.. doxygengroup:: grant_table
Why is this Arm64-specific?
> @@ -73,20 +75,25 @@
> * frame, or zero if none.
> * 3. Write memory barrier (WMB).
> * 4. Write ent->flags, inc. valid type.
> + * @endcode
> *
> * Invalidating an unused GTF_permit_access entry:
> + * @code
> * 1. flags = ent->flags.
> * 2. Observe that !(flags & (GTF_reading|GTF_writing)).
> * 3. Check result of SMP-safe CMPXCHG(&ent->flags, flags, 0).
> * NB. No need for WMB as reuse of entry is control-dependent on success of
> * step 3, and all architectures guarantee ordering of ctrl-dep writes.
> + * @endcode
> *
> * Invalidating an in-use GTF_permit_access entry:
> + *
> * This cannot be done directly. Request assistance from the domain controller
> * which can set a timeout on the use of a grant entry and take necessary
> * action. (NB. This is not yet implemented!).
> *
> * Invalidating an unused GTF_accept_transfer entry:
> + * @code
> * 1. flags = ent->flags.
> * 2. Observe that !(flags & GTF_transfer_committed). [*]
> * 3. Check result of SMP-safe CMPXCHG(&ent->flags, flags, 0).
> @@ -97,47 +104,55 @@
> * transferred frame is written. It is safe for the guest to spin waiting
> * for this to occur (detect by observing GTF_transfer_completed in
> * ent->flags).
> + * @endcode
> *
> * Invalidating a committed GTF_accept_transfer entry:
> * 1. Wait for (ent->flags & GTF_transfer_completed).
> *
> * Changing a GTF_permit_access from writable to read-only:
> + *
> * Use SMP-safe CMPXCHG to set GTF_readonly, while checking !GTF_writing.
> *
> * Changing a GTF_permit_access from read-only to writable:
> + *
> * Use SMP-safe bit-setting instruction.
For example - are the blank lines you add necessary or merely nice
to have in your personal opinion?
> - */
> -
> -/*
> - * Reference to a grant entry in a specified domain's grant table.
> - */
> -typedef uint32_t grant_ref_t;
Why does this get moved ...
> -
> -/*
> + *
> * A grant table comprises a packed array of grant entries in one or more
> * page frames shared between Xen and a guest.
> + *
> * [XEN]: This field is written by Xen and read by the sharing guest.
> + *
> * [GST]: This field is written by the guest and read by Xen.
> + *
> + * @addtogroup grant_table Grant Tables
> + * @{
> */
>
> -/*
> - * Version 1 of the grant table entry structure is maintained purely
> - * for backwards compatibility. New guests should use version 2.
> +/**
> + * Reference to a grant entry in a specified domain's grant table.
> */
> +typedef uint32_t grant_ref_t;
... here, past a comment unrelated to it?
> @@ -243,23 +258,27 @@ union grant_entry_v2 {
> * In that case, the frame field has the same semantics as the
> * field of the same name in the V1 entry structure.
> */
> + /** @cond skip anonymous struct/union for doxygen */
> struct {
> grant_entry_header_t hdr;
> uint32_t pad0;
> uint64_t frame;
> } full_page;
> + /** @endcond */
>
> /*
> * If the grant type is GTF_grant_access and GTF_sub_page is set,
> * @domid is allowed to access bytes [@page_off,@page_off+@length)
> * in frame @frame.
> */
> + /** @cond skip anonymous struct/union for doxygen */
> struct {
> grant_entry_header_t hdr;
> uint16_t page_off;
> uint16_t length;
> uint64_t frame;
> } sub_page;
> + /** @endcond */
>
> /*
> * If the grant is GTF_transitive, @domid is allowed to use the
> @@ -270,12 +289,14 @@ union grant_entry_v2 {
> * The current version of Xen does not allow transitive grants
> * to be mapped.
> */
> + /** @cond skip anonymous struct/union for doxygen */
> struct {
> grant_entry_header_t hdr;
> domid_t trans_domid;
> uint16_t pad0;
> grant_ref_t gref;
> } transitive;
> + /** @endcond */
While already better than the introduction of strange struct tags,
I'm still not convinced we want this extra clutter (sorry). Plus -
don't these additions mean the sub-structures then won't be
represented in the generated doc, rendering it (partly) useless?
> @@ -433,7 +454,12 @@ typedef struct gnttab_transfer gnttab_transfer_t;
> DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(gnttab_transfer_t);
>
>
> -/*
> +#define _GNTCOPY_source_gref (0)
> +#define GNTCOPY_source_gref (1<<_GNTCOPY_source_gref)
> +#define _GNTCOPY_dest_gref (1)
> +#define GNTCOPY_dest_gref (1<<_GNTCOPY_dest_gref)
> +
> +/**
> * GNTTABOP_copy: Hypervisor based copy
> * source and destinations can be eithers MFNs or, for foreign domains,
> * grant references. the foreign domain has to grant read/write access
> @@ -451,18 +477,15 @@ DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(gnttab_transfer_t);
> * bytes to be copied.
> */
>
> -#define _GNTCOPY_source_gref (0)
> -#define GNTCOPY_source_gref (1<<_GNTCOPY_source_gref)
> -#define _GNTCOPY_dest_gref (1)
> -#define GNTCOPY_dest_gref (1<<_GNTCOPY_dest_gref)
> -
> struct gnttab_copy {
Again the question - why the movement?
> @@ -579,17 +602,19 @@ struct gnttab_swap_grant_ref {
> typedef struct gnttab_swap_grant_ref gnttab_swap_grant_ref_t;
> DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(gnttab_swap_grant_ref_t);
>
> -/*
> +/**
> * Issue one or more cache maintenance operations on a portion of a
> * page granted to the calling domain by a foreign domain.
> */
> struct gnttab_cache_flush {
> + /** @cond skip anonymous struct/union for doxygen */
> union {
> uint64_t dev_bus_addr;
> grant_ref_t ref;
> } a;
> - uint16_t offset; /* offset from start of grant */
> - uint16_t length; /* size within the grant */
> + /** @endcond */
> + uint16_t offset; /**< offset from start of grant */
> + uint16_t length; /**< size within the grant */
Skipping just part of a struct is perhaps even more confusing than
omitting it altogether.
Also, what's the significance of "/**<" ?
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-19 11:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-19 9:12 [PATCH v2 0/3] Use Doxygen and sphinx for html documentation Luca Fancellu
2021-04-19 9:12 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] docs: add doxygen support " Luca Fancellu
2021-04-19 9:12 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] docs: hypercalls sphinx skeleton for generated html Luca Fancellu
2021-04-19 9:12 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] docs/doxygen: doxygen documentation for grant_table.h Luca Fancellu
2021-04-19 11:05 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2021-04-20 8:46 ` Luca Fancellu
2021-04-20 9:14 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-20 9:42 ` Luca Fancellu
2021-04-20 10:27 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-22 7:39 ` Luca Fancellu
2021-04-22 8:06 ` Jan Beulich
2021-04-26 15:40 ` Luca Fancellu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=c8e1022f-abb0-56f3-db37-5cec4d01dead@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=bertrand.marquis@arm.com \
--cc=george.dunlap@citrix.com \
--cc=iwj@xenproject.org \
--cc=julien@xen.org \
--cc=luca.fancellu@arm.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=wei.chen@arm.com \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).