[PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[fu.wei]

From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>

This patch updates the documentation for allowing detection of an XSM
module that lacks a specific compatible string.
This mechanism has been added by the commit
ca32012341f3de7d3975407fb963e6028f0d0c8b.

Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
---
v2: Improve the doc, according to the suggestion from Julien Grall.

v1: http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-04/msg02070.html
    The first upstream version submitted in xen-devel mailing list.

 docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
index ad98bf3..254ba77 100644
--- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
+++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
@@ -24,10 +24,24 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
 	string (which must always be present).
 
 	Xen will assume that the first module which lacks a more
-	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel" and that
-	the second such is a "multiboot,ramdisk". Any subsequent
-	modules which lack a specific compatiblity string will not
-	receive any special treatment.
+	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel".
+
+	Xen will check all the modules for the XSM Magic from the second
+	module that lacks a specific compatible string. According to the
+	result of the detection:
+	- if it's a XSM, Xen will assume its compatible string is a
+	  "xen,xsm-policy";
+	- if it's not a XSM, for the second module that lacks a specific
+	  compatible string, Xen will assume its compatible string is a
+	  "multiboot,ramdisk"; for the third and subsequent modules those
+	  lacks a specific compatible string will not receive any special
+	  treatment.
+	This means if the ramdisk module is present and does not have the
+	compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be the
+	second module.
+	Note: This XSM Magic detection behavior was introduced by Xen 4.7.
+	Xen 4.6 (and downwards) still requires the XSM module to have the
+	compatible string "xen,xsm-policy".
 
 	Xen 4.4 supported a different set of legacy compatible strings
 	which remain supported such that systems supporting both 4.4
-- 
2.5.5


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 21.04.16 at 13:07, <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote:

Please follow the patch submission rules: Mail them _to_ the list,
_cc_-ing relevant people. Cc-ing the list twice makes little sense.
And please also apply some common sense when deciding who to
Cc - I don't think there's much point in Cc-ing other than ARM
maintainers on ARM specific doc patches (arguably that should be
reflected in ./MAINTAINERS).

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Julien Grall]

(CC Wei for the release-ack)

Hi Fu Wei,

On 21/04/16 12:07, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote:
> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
>
> This patch updates the documentation for allowing detection of an XSM
> module that lacks a specific compatible string.
> This mechanism has been added by the commit
> ca32012341f3de7d3975407fb963e6028f0d0c8b.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>

The new version looks good to me:

Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>

Can a native speaker (Ian, Konrad, George) double-check the wording)?

Wei, this patch only update the doc. I am not sure whether we need your 
release-ack.

Regards,

> ---
> v2: Improve the doc, according to the suggestion from Julien Grall.
>
> v1: http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-04/msg02070.html
>      The first upstream version submitted in xen-devel mailing list.
>
>   docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
>   1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> index ad98bf3..254ba77 100644
> --- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> +++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> @@ -24,10 +24,24 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
>   	string (which must always be present).
>
>   	Xen will assume that the first module which lacks a more
> -	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel" and that
> -	the second such is a "multiboot,ramdisk". Any subsequent
> -	modules which lack a specific compatiblity string will not
> -	receive any special treatment.
> +	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel".
> +
> +	Xen will check all the modules for the XSM Magic from the second
> +	module that lacks a specific compatible string. According to the
> +	result of the detection:
> +	- if it's a XSM, Xen will assume its compatible string is a
> +	  "xen,xsm-policy";
> +	- if it's not a XSM, for the second module that lacks a specific
> +	  compatible string, Xen will assume its compatible string is a
> +	  "multiboot,ramdisk"; for the third and subsequent modules those
> +	  lacks a specific compatible string will not receive any special
> +	  treatment.
> +	This means if the ramdisk module is present and does not have the
> +	compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be the
> +	second module.
> +	Note: This XSM Magic detection behavior was introduced by Xen 4.7.
> +	Xen 4.6 (and downwards) still requires the XSM module to have the
> +	compatible string "xen,xsm-policy".
>
>   	Xen 4.4 supported a different set of legacy compatible strings
>   	which remain supported such that systems supporting both 4.4
>

-- 
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Julien Grall]

Sorry, I forgot to mention the typo in the title:

s/documention/documentation/

On 22/04/16 17:40, Julien Grall wrote:
> (CC Wei for the release-ack)
>
> Hi Fu Wei,
>
> On 21/04/16 12:07, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote:
>> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
>>
>> This patch updates the documentation for allowing detection of an XSM
>> module that lacks a specific compatible string.
>> This mechanism has been added by the commit
>> ca32012341f3de7d3975407fb963e6028f0d0c8b.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
>
> The new version looks good to me:
>
> Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
>
> Can a native speaker (Ian, Konrad, George) double-check the wording)?
>
> Wei, this patch only update the doc. I am not sure whether we need your
> release-ack.
>
> Regards,
>
>> ---
>> v2: Improve the doc, according to the suggestion from Julien Grall.
>>
>> v1: http://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-04/msg02070.html
>>      The first upstream version submitted in xen-devel mailing list.
>>
>>   docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
>>   1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
>> b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
>> index ad98bf3..254ba77 100644
>> --- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
>> +++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
>> @@ -24,10 +24,24 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
>>       string (which must always be present).
>>
>>       Xen will assume that the first module which lacks a more
>> -    specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel" and that
>> -    the second such is a "multiboot,ramdisk". Any subsequent
>> -    modules which lack a specific compatiblity string will not
>> -    receive any special treatment.
>> +    specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel".
>> +
>> +    Xen will check all the modules for the XSM Magic from the second
>> +    module that lacks a specific compatible string. According to the
>> +    result of the detection:
>> +    - if it's a XSM, Xen will assume its compatible string is a
>> +      "xen,xsm-policy";
>> +    - if it's not a XSM, for the second module that lacks a specific
>> +      compatible string, Xen will assume its compatible string is a
>> +      "multiboot,ramdisk"; for the third and subsequent modules those
>> +      lacks a specific compatible string will not receive any special
>> +      treatment.
>> +    This means if the ramdisk module is present and does not have the
>> +    compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be the
>> +    second module.
>> +    Note: This XSM Magic detection behavior was introduced by Xen 4.7.
>> +    Xen 4.6 (and downwards) still requires the XSM module to have the
>> +    compatible string "xen,xsm-policy".
>>
>>       Xen 4.4 supported a different set of legacy compatible strings
>>       which remain supported such that systems supporting both 4.4
>>
>

-- 
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Wei Liu]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 05:40:02PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> (CC Wei for the release-ack)
> 
> Hi Fu Wei,
> 
> On 21/04/16 12:07, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote:
> >From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> >
> >This patch updates the documentation for allowing detection of an XSM
> >module that lacks a specific compatible string.
> >This mechanism has been added by the commit
> >ca32012341f3de7d3975407fb963e6028f0d0c8b.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> 
> The new version looks good to me:
> 
> Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
> 
> Can a native speaker (Ian, Konrad, George) double-check the wording)?
> 
> Wei, this patch only update the doc. I am not sure whether we need your
> release-ack.
> 

FAOD:

Release-acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Fri, 22 Apr 2016, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 05:40:02PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> > (CC Wei for the release-ack)
> > 
> > Hi Fu Wei,
> > 
> > On 21/04/16 12:07, fu.wei@linaro.org wrote:
> > >From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> > >
> > >This patch updates the documentation for allowing detection of an XSM
> > >module that lacks a specific compatible string.
> > >This mechanism has been added by the commit
> > >ca32012341f3de7d3975407fb963e6028f0d0c8b.
> > >
> > >Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> > 
> > The new version looks good to me:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
> > 
> > Can a native speaker (Ian, Konrad, George) double-check the wording)?
> > 
> > Wei, this patch only update the doc. I am not sure whether we need your
> > release-ack.
> > 
> 
> FAOD:
> 
> Release-acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>

Improved the wording and committed

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

[PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Ian Jackson]

Julien Grall writes ("Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support"):
> The new version looks good to me:
> Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
> 
> Can a native speaker (Ian, Konrad, George) double-check the wording)?

I found it rather difficult to read.  See updated version, attached.

I dropped your ack because I want to be sure that the new version
still describes the actual behaviour.  I kept Wei's release-ack.

Thanks,
Ian.

From bd8f24667d353a4c90203d51c1fdb42a66b79973 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 19:07:09 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

This patch updates the documentation for allowing detection of an XSM
module that lacks a specific compatible string.

(This mechanism was added in commit ca32012341f3,
 "xen/arm64: check XSM Magic from the second unknown module.")

Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Release-acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
---
 docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
index ad98bf3..f3179d6 100644
--- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
+++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
@@ -24,10 +24,29 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
 	string (which must always be present).
 
 	Xen will assume that the first module which lacks a more
-	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel" and that
-	the second such is a "multiboot,ramdisk". Any subsequent
-	modules which lack a specific compatiblity string will not
-	receive any special treatment.
+	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel".
+
+	Xen will examine each module, starting from the second
+	module that lacks a specific compatible string.  Xen will
+        check each such module for the XSM Magic number:
+
+	- For a module which has the XSM Magic number: it will be
+          treated by Xen as if its compatible string was
+          "xen,xsm-policy";
+
+	- For a module which does not have the XSM Magic: the second
+          module lacking a compatible string will be treated by Xen as
+          if its compatible string was "multiboot,ramdisk"; for the
+          third and subsequent modules which lack a specific
+          compatible string, Xen will not apply any special treatment.
+
+	This means if the ramdisk module is present and does not have the
+	compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be the
+	second module.
+
+	Note: This XSM Magic detection behavior was introduced by Xen 4.7.
+	Xen 4.6 (and downwards) still requires the XSM module to have the
+	compatible string "xen,xsm-policy".
 
 	Xen 4.4 supported a different set of legacy compatible strings
 	which remain supported such that systems supporting both 4.4
-- 
1.7.10.4


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Ian Jackson]

Stefano Stabellini writes ("Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support"):
> Improved the wording and committed

I see my mail proposing a new version crossed with yours.

Also, I seem to be racing in committing with you.

Can you come onto IRC so we can coordinate ?

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 06:29:34PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Julien Grall writes ("Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support"):
> > The new version looks good to me:
> > Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
> > 
> > Can a native speaker (Ian, Konrad, George) double-check the wording)?
> 
> I found it rather difficult to read.  See updated version, attached.
> 
> I dropped your ack because I want to be sure that the new version
> still describes the actual behaviour.  I kept Wei's release-ack.
> 
> Thanks,
> Ian.
> 
> >From bd8f24667d353a4c90203d51c1fdb42a66b79973 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 19:07:09 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support
> 
> This patch updates the documentation for allowing detection of an XSM
> module that lacks a specific compatible string.
> 
> (This mechanism was added in commit ca32012341f3,
>  "xen/arm64: check XSM Magic from the second unknown module.")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> Release-acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
> ---
>  docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt |   27 +++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> index ad98bf3..f3179d6 100644
> --- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> +++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> @@ -24,10 +24,29 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
>  	string (which must always be present).
>  
>  	Xen will assume that the first module which lacks a more
> -	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel" and that
> -	the second such is a "multiboot,ramdisk". Any subsequent
> -	modules which lack a specific compatiblity string will not
> -	receive any special treatment.
> +	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel".
> +
> +	Xen will examine each module, starting from the second
> +	module that lacks a specific compatible string.  Xen will
> +        check each such module for the XSM Magic number:

Not sure why you have the extra spaces before 'check'?
> +
> +	- For a module which has the XSM Magic number: it will be
> +          treated by Xen as if its compatible string was
> +          "xen,xsm-policy";
> +
> +	- For a module which does not have the XSM Magic: the second
> +          module lacking a compatible string will be treated by Xen as
> +          if its compatible string was "multiboot,ramdisk"; for the
> +          third and subsequent modules which lack a specific
> +          compatible string, Xen will not apply any special treatment.
> +
> +	This means if the ramdisk module is present and does not have the
> +	compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be the
> +	second module.
> +
> +	Note: This XSM Magic detection behavior was introduced by Xen 4.7.

in Xen 4.7?

Either way - those are really nitpicks and free free to ignore them.

Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>


> +	Xen 4.6 (and downwards) still requires the XSM module to have the
> +	compatible string "xen,xsm-policy".
>  
>  	Xen 4.4 supported a different set of legacy compatible strings
>  	which remain supported such that systems supporting both 4.4

Y
> -- 
> 1.7.10.4
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Julien Grall]

Hi Ian,

On 22/04/16 18:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Julien Grall writes ("Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support"):
>> The new version looks good to me:
>> Acked-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
>>
>> Can a native speaker (Ian, Konrad, George) double-check the wording)?
>
> I found it rather difficult to read.  See updated version, attached.

Stefano has committed the previous version with some modifications. Is 
it better to read?

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Ian Jackson]

Julien Grall writes ("Re: [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support"):
> Stefano has committed the previous version with some modifications. Is 
> it better to read?

IMO it is better than the original but I still think my proposed
wording is an improvement over Stefano's.

Should I "rebase" it and resubmit ?

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Julien Grall writes ("Re: [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support"):
> > Stefano has committed the previous version with some modifications. Is 
> > it better to read?
> 
> IMO it is better than the original but I still think my proposed
> wording is an improvement over Stefano's.
> 
> Should I "rebase" it and resubmit ?

Sure, thanks.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

[PATCH] docs/arm64: clarify the documention for loading XSM support

[Ian Jackson]

From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>

Improve the clarity of the wording introduced in 67831c4c
"docs/arm64: update the documentation for loading XSM support"

Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
CC: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,
CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
---
 docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt |   31 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
index cae46eda..f3179d6 100644
--- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
+++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
@@ -26,19 +26,24 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
 	Xen will assume that the first module which lacks a more
 	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel".
 
-	Xen will check all the modules for the XSM Magic from the second
-	module that lacks a specific compatible string. According to the
-	result of the detection:
-	- if it's an XSM, Xen will assume its compatible string is
-	  "xen,xsm-policy";
-	- if it's not an XSM, for the second module that lacks a specific
-	  compatible string, Xen will assume its compatible string is
-	  "multiboot,ramdisk"; the third and subsequent modules that
-	  lack a specific compatible string will not receive any special
-	  treatment.
-	This means that if the ramdisk module is present and does not have
-	the compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be
-	the second module.
+	Xen will examine each module, starting from the second
+	module that lacks a specific compatible string.  Xen will
+        check each such module for the XSM Magic number:
+
+	- For a module which has the XSM Magic number: it will be
+          treated by Xen as if its compatible string was
+          "xen,xsm-policy";
+
+	- For a module which does not have the XSM Magic: the second
+          module lacking a compatible string will be treated by Xen as
+          if its compatible string was "multiboot,ramdisk"; for the
+          third and subsequent modules which lack a specific
+          compatible string, Xen will not apply any special treatment.
+
+	This means if the ramdisk module is present and does not have the
+	compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be the
+	second module.
+
 	Note: This XSM Magic detection behavior was introduced by Xen 4.7.
 	Xen 4.6 (and downwards) still requires the XSM module to have the
 	compatible string "xen,xsm-policy".
-- 
1.7.10.4


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH] docs/arm64: clarify the documention for loading XSM support

[Julien Grall]

Hi Ian,

On 25/04/16 16:35, Ian Jackson wrote:
> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
>
> Improve the clarity of the wording introduced in 67831c4c
> "docs/arm64: update the documentation for loading XSM support"
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> CC: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,

Somehow, I am not in the mail CC. Maybe because of the "," at the end?

Otherwise, the text looks good to me. I have some questions about the 
formatting, see below.

> CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
> ---
>   docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt |   31 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
>   1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> index cae46eda..f3179d6 100644
> --- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> +++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> @@ -26,19 +26,24 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
>   	Xen will assume that the first module which lacks a more
>   	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel".
>
> -	Xen will check all the modules for the XSM Magic from the second
> -	module that lacks a specific compatible string. According to the
> -	result of the detection:
> -	- if it's an XSM, Xen will assume its compatible string is
> -	  "xen,xsm-policy";
> -	- if it's not an XSM, for the second module that lacks a specific
> -	  compatible string, Xen will assume its compatible string is
> -	  "multiboot,ramdisk"; the third and subsequent modules that
> -	  lack a specific compatible string will not receive any special
> -	  treatment.
> -	This means that if the ramdisk module is present and does not have
> -	the compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be
> -	the second module.
> +	Xen will examine each module, starting from the second
> +	module that lacks a specific compatible string.  Xen will

NIT: there is 2 spaces rather than 1 before "Xen".

> +        check each such module for the XSM Magic number:

I am not sure sure why the extra spaces before "check"?

> +
> +	- For a module which has the XSM Magic number: it will be
> +          treated by Xen as if its compatible string was
> +          "xen,xsm-policy";

Ditto

> +
> +	- For a module which does not have the XSM Magic: the second
> +          module lacking a compatible string will be treated by Xen as
> +          if its compatible string was "multiboot,ramdisk"; for the
> +          third and subsequent modules which lack a specific
> +          compatible string, Xen will not apply any special treatment.

Ditto

> +
> +	This means if the ramdisk module is present and does not have the
> +	compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be the
> +	second module.
> +
>   	Note: This XSM Magic detection behavior was introduced by Xen 4.7.
>   	Xen 4.6 (and downwards) still requires the XSM module to have the
>   	compatible string "xen,xsm-policy".
>

Regards,

-- 
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH] docs/arm64: clarify the documention for loading XSM support

[Ian Jackson]

Julien Grall writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] docs/arm64: clarify the
> Somehow, I am not in the mail CC. Maybe because of the "," at the end?

How odd.

> Otherwise, the text looks good to me. I have some questions about the 
> formatting, see below.

I think there has been some damage from repeated tab<->space
conversions.

I will resend.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

[PATCH v2] docs/arm64: clarify the documention for loading XSM support

[Ian Jackson]

From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>

Improve the clarity of the wording introduced in 67831c4c
"docs/arm64: update the documentation for loading XSM support"

Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
CC: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
---
v2: Tabify (to conform to the rest of the file)
---
 docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt |   29 +++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
index cae46eda..ce2d0dc 100644
--- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
+++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
@@ -26,19 +26,24 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
 	Xen will assume that the first module which lacks a more
 	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel".
 
-	Xen will check all the modules for the XSM Magic from the second
-	module that lacks a specific compatible string. According to the
-	result of the detection:
-	- if it's an XSM, Xen will assume its compatible string is
+	Xen will examine each module, starting from the second
+	module that lacks a specific compatible string.  Xen will
+	check each such module for the XSM Magic number:
+
+	- For a module which has the XSM Magic number: it will be
+	  treated by Xen as if its compatible string was
 	  "xen,xsm-policy";
-	- if it's not an XSM, for the second module that lacks a specific
-	  compatible string, Xen will assume its compatible string is
-	  "multiboot,ramdisk"; the third and subsequent modules that
-	  lack a specific compatible string will not receive any special
-	  treatment.
-	This means that if the ramdisk module is present and does not have
-	the compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be
-	the second module.
+
+	- For a module which does not have the XSM Magic: the second
+	  module lacking a compatible string will be treated by Xen as
+	  if its compatible string was "multiboot,ramdisk"; for the
+	  third and subsequent modules which lack a specific
+	  compatible string, Xen will not apply any special treatment.
+
+	This means if the ramdisk module is present and does not have the
+	compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be the
+	second module.
+
 	Note: This XSM Magic detection behavior was introduced by Xen 4.7.
 	Xen 4.6 (and downwards) still requires the XSM module to have the
 	compatible string "xen,xsm-policy".
-- 
1.7.10.4


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: clarify the documention for loading XSM support

[Julien Grall]

Hi Ian,

On 25/04/16 17:38, Ian Jackson wrote:
> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
>
> Improve the clarity of the wording introduced in 67831c4c
> "docs/arm64: update the documentation for loading XSM support"
>
> Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> CC: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>

Reviewed-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>

Regards,

> CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
> ---
> v2: Tabify (to conform to the rest of the file)
> ---
>   docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt |   29 +++++++++++++++++------------
>   1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> index cae46eda..ce2d0dc 100644
> --- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> +++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> @@ -26,19 +26,24 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
>   	Xen will assume that the first module which lacks a more
>   	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel".
>
> -	Xen will check all the modules for the XSM Magic from the second
> -	module that lacks a specific compatible string. According to the
> -	result of the detection:
> -	- if it's an XSM, Xen will assume its compatible string is
> +	Xen will examine each module, starting from the second
> +	module that lacks a specific compatible string.  Xen will
> +	check each such module for the XSM Magic number:
> +
> +	- For a module which has the XSM Magic number: it will be
> +	  treated by Xen as if its compatible string was
>   	  "xen,xsm-policy";
> -	- if it's not an XSM, for the second module that lacks a specific
> -	  compatible string, Xen will assume its compatible string is
> -	  "multiboot,ramdisk"; the third and subsequent modules that
> -	  lack a specific compatible string will not receive any special
> -	  treatment.
> -	This means that if the ramdisk module is present and does not have
> -	the compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be
> -	the second module.
> +
> +	- For a module which does not have the XSM Magic: the second
> +	  module lacking a compatible string will be treated by Xen as
> +	  if its compatible string was "multiboot,ramdisk"; for the
> +	  third and subsequent modules which lack a specific
> +	  compatible string, Xen will not apply any special treatment.
> +
> +	This means if the ramdisk module is present and does not have the
> +	compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be the
> +	second module.
> +
>   	Note: This XSM Magic detection behavior was introduced by Xen 4.7.
>   	Xen 4.6 (and downwards) still requires the XSM module to have the
>   	compatible string "xen,xsm-policy".
>

-- 
Julien Grall

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: clarify the documention for loading XSM support

[Wei Liu]

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 05:45:58PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi Ian,
> 
> On 25/04/16 17:38, Ian Jackson wrote:
> >From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> >
> >Improve the clarity of the wording introduced in 67831c4c
> >"docs/arm64: update the documentation for loading XSM support"
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> >CC: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> >CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
> 

Queued. Thanks.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH] docs/arm64: clarify the documention for loading XSM support

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> 
> Improve the clarity of the wording introduced in 67831c4c
> "docs/arm64: update the documentation for loading XSM support"
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> CC: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,
> CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>

Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>

Added to my queue.


>  docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt |   31 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> index cae46eda..f3179d6 100644
> --- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> +++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> @@ -26,19 +26,24 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
>  	Xen will assume that the first module which lacks a more
>  	specific compatible string is a "multiboot,kernel".
>  
> -	Xen will check all the modules for the XSM Magic from the second
> -	module that lacks a specific compatible string. According to the
> -	result of the detection:
> -	- if it's an XSM, Xen will assume its compatible string is
> -	  "xen,xsm-policy";
> -	- if it's not an XSM, for the second module that lacks a specific
> -	  compatible string, Xen will assume its compatible string is
> -	  "multiboot,ramdisk"; the third and subsequent modules that
> -	  lack a specific compatible string will not receive any special
> -	  treatment.
> -	This means that if the ramdisk module is present and does not have
> -	the compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be
> -	the second module.
> +	Xen will examine each module, starting from the second
> +	module that lacks a specific compatible string.  Xen will
> +        check each such module for the XSM Magic number:
> +
> +	- For a module which has the XSM Magic number: it will be
> +          treated by Xen as if its compatible string was
> +          "xen,xsm-policy";
> +
> +	- For a module which does not have the XSM Magic: the second
> +          module lacking a compatible string will be treated by Xen as
> +          if its compatible string was "multiboot,ramdisk"; for the
> +          third and subsequent modules which lack a specific
> +          compatible string, Xen will not apply any special treatment.
> +
> +	This means if the ramdisk module is present and does not have the
> +	compatible string "multiboot,ramdisk", then it must always be the
> +	second module.
> +
>  	Note: This XSM Magic detection behavior was introduced by Xen 4.7.
>  	Xen 4.6 (and downwards) still requires the XSM module to have the
>  	compatible string "xen,xsm-policy".
> -- 
> 1.7.10.4
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH] docs/arm64: clarify the documention for loading XSM support

[Wei Liu]

On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:47:34AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> > 
> > Improve the clarity of the wording introduced in 67831c4c
> > "docs/arm64: update the documentation for loading XSM support"
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> > CC: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> > CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,
> > CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
> 
> Added to my queue.
> 

FYI this patch is already applied last night. I picked this up too when
I committed my queue.

I will leave all the ARM patches to you in the future if they aren't
urgent. That should avoid us racing with each other.

Wei.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH] docs/arm64: clarify the documention for loading XSM support

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Tue, 26 Apr 2016, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:47:34AM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > > From: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> > > 
> > > Improve the clarity of the wording introduced in 67831c4c
> > > "docs/arm64: update the documentation for loading XSM support"
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
> > > CC: Fu Wei <fu.wei@linaro.org>
> > > CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>,
> > > CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
> > 
> > Added to my queue.
> > 
> 
> FYI this patch is already applied last night. I picked this up too when
> I committed my queue.
> 
> I will leave all the ARM patches to you in the future if they aren't
> urgent. That should avoid us racing with each other.

All right, thanks

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v2] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Fu Wei]

Hi Jan,

On 21 April 2016 at 19:40, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>> On 21.04.16 at 13:07, <fu.wei@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Please follow the patch submission rules: Mail them _to_ the list,
> _cc_-ing relevant people. Cc-ing the list twice makes little sense.
> And please also apply some common sense when deciding who to
> Cc - I don't think there's much point in Cc-ing other than ARM
> maintainers on ARM specific doc patches (arguably that should be
> reflected in ./MAINTAINERS).

Sorry for late response,
Thanks for your help, will fix my script :-)

>
> Jan
>



-- 
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
Shanghai,China 200021

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel

Re: [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support

[Fu Wei]

Hi All,

Great thanks for  all your help :-)

On 25 April 2016 at 23:25, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Apr 2016, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Julien Grall writes ("Re: [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support"):
>> > Stefano has committed the previous version with some modifications. Is
>> > it better to read?
>>
>> IMO it is better than the original but I still think my proposed
>> wording is an improvement over Stefano's.
>>
>> Should I "rebase" it and resubmit ?
>
> Sure, thanks.



-- 
Best regards,

Fu Wei
Software Engineer
Red Hat Software (Beijing) Co.,Ltd.Shanghai Branch
Ph: +86 21 61221326(direct)
Ph: +86 186 2020 4684 (mobile)
Room 1512, Regus One Corporate Avenue,Level 15,
One Corporate Avenue,222 Hubin Road,Huangpu District,
Shanghai,China 200021

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel