From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com> To: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefanos@xilinx.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/10] xen/arm: make process_memory_node a device_tree_node_func Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 10:47:30 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <8448a1f5-75de-123b-b496-bdc9b99826b2@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1556658172-8824-7-git-send-email-sstabellini@kernel.org> Hi, On 30/04/2019 22:02, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > Change the signature of process_memory_node to match > device_tree_node_func. NAck in the current form. If a function return a value, then it should be checked appropriately and not ignored. But then, the commit message leads to think you are going to use device_tree_node_func here while in fact it is in the next patch. Please update the commit message accordingly. > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefanos@xilinx.com> > --- > Changes in v2: > - new > --- > xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c | 16 ++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c > index e7b08ed..b6600ab 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c > @@ -124,9 +124,10 @@ int __init device_tree_for_each_node(const void *fdt, > return 0; > } > > -static void __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, > - const char *name, > - u32 address_cells, u32 size_cells) > +static int __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, > + const char *name, int depth, > + u32 address_cells, u32 size_cells, > + void *data) > { > const struct fdt_property *prop; > int i; > @@ -139,14 +140,14 @@ static void __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, > { > printk("fdt: node `%s': invalid #address-cells or #size-cells", > name); > - return; > + return 0; > } > > prop = fdt_get_property(fdt, node, "reg", NULL); > if ( !prop ) > { > printk("fdt: node `%s': missing `reg' property\n", name); > - return; > + return 0; > } > > cell = (const __be32 *)prop->data; > @@ -161,6 +162,8 @@ static void __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, > bootinfo.mem.bank[bootinfo.mem.nr_banks].size = size; > bootinfo.mem.nr_banks++; > } > + > + return 0; > } > > static void __init process_multiboot_node(const void *fdt, int node, > @@ -293,7 +296,8 @@ static int __init early_scan_node(const void *fdt, > void *data) > { > if ( device_tree_node_matches(fdt, node, "memory") ) > - process_memory_node(fdt, node, name, address_cells, size_cells); > + process_memory_node(fdt, node, name, depth, address_cells, size_cells, > + NULL); > else if ( depth <= 3 && (device_tree_node_compatible(fdt, node, "xen,multiboot-module" ) || > device_tree_node_compatible(fdt, node, "multiboot,module" ))) > process_multiboot_node(fdt, node, name, address_cells, size_cells); > Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com> To: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefanos@xilinx.com> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 07/10] xen/arm: make process_memory_node a device_tree_node_func Date: Wed, 1 May 2019 10:47:30 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <8448a1f5-75de-123b-b496-bdc9b99826b2@arm.com> (raw) Message-ID: <20190501094730.gieJjbAOyGC6QFNOf6EQ4_kfMl1E-6CA326DzbkqXFE@z> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1556658172-8824-7-git-send-email-sstabellini@kernel.org> Hi, On 30/04/2019 22:02, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > Change the signature of process_memory_node to match > device_tree_node_func. NAck in the current form. If a function return a value, then it should be checked appropriately and not ignored. But then, the commit message leads to think you are going to use device_tree_node_func here while in fact it is in the next patch. Please update the commit message accordingly. > > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefanos@xilinx.com> > --- > Changes in v2: > - new > --- > xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c | 16 ++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c > index e7b08ed..b6600ab 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/bootfdt.c > @@ -124,9 +124,10 @@ int __init device_tree_for_each_node(const void *fdt, > return 0; > } > > -static void __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, > - const char *name, > - u32 address_cells, u32 size_cells) > +static int __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, > + const char *name, int depth, > + u32 address_cells, u32 size_cells, > + void *data) > { > const struct fdt_property *prop; > int i; > @@ -139,14 +140,14 @@ static void __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, > { > printk("fdt: node `%s': invalid #address-cells or #size-cells", > name); > - return; > + return 0; > } > > prop = fdt_get_property(fdt, node, "reg", NULL); > if ( !prop ) > { > printk("fdt: node `%s': missing `reg' property\n", name); > - return; > + return 0; > } > > cell = (const __be32 *)prop->data; > @@ -161,6 +162,8 @@ static void __init process_memory_node(const void *fdt, int node, > bootinfo.mem.bank[bootinfo.mem.nr_banks].size = size; > bootinfo.mem.nr_banks++; > } > + > + return 0; > } > > static void __init process_multiboot_node(const void *fdt, int node, > @@ -293,7 +296,8 @@ static int __init early_scan_node(const void *fdt, > void *data) > { > if ( device_tree_node_matches(fdt, node, "memory") ) > - process_memory_node(fdt, node, name, address_cells, size_cells); > + process_memory_node(fdt, node, name, depth, address_cells, size_cells, > + NULL); > else if ( depth <= 3 && (device_tree_node_compatible(fdt, node, "xen,multiboot-module" ) || > device_tree_node_compatible(fdt, node, "multiboot,module" ))) > process_multiboot_node(fdt, node, name, address_cells, size_cells); > Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-01 9:47 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 86+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-04-30 21:02 [PATCH v2 0/10] iomem memory policy Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [PATCH v2 01/10] xen: add a p2mt parameter to map_mmio_regions Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-02 14:59 ` Jan Beulich 2019-05-02 14:59 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich 2019-05-02 18:49 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-02 18:49 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-15 13:39 ` Oleksandr 2019-05-15 13:39 ` [Xen-devel] " Oleksandr 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [PATCH v2 02/10] xen: rename un/map_mmio_regions to un/map_regions Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-01 9:22 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-01 9:22 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-06-17 21:24 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-06-18 11:05 ` Julien Grall 2019-06-18 20:19 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-02 15:03 ` Jan Beulich 2019-05-02 15:03 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich 2019-05-02 18:55 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-02 18:55 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [PATCH v2 03/10] xen: extend XEN_DOMCTL_memory_mapping to handle memory policy Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-02 15:12 ` Jan Beulich 2019-05-02 15:12 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich 2019-06-17 21:28 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-06-18 8:59 ` Jan Beulich 2019-06-18 20:32 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-06-18 23:15 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-06-19 6:53 ` Jan Beulich 2019-05-07 16:41 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-07 16:41 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-06-17 22:43 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-06-18 11:13 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-15 14:40 ` Oleksandr 2019-05-15 14:40 ` [Xen-devel] " Oleksandr 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [PATCH v2 04/10] libxc: introduce xc_domain_mem_map_policy Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [PATCH v2 05/10] libxl/xl: add memory policy option to iomem Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-01 9:42 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-01 9:42 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-06-17 22:32 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-06-18 11:09 ` Julien Grall 2019-06-18 11:15 ` Julien Grall 2019-06-18 22:07 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-06-18 22:20 ` Julien Grall 2019-06-18 22:46 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [PATCH v2 06/10] xen/arm: extend device_tree_for_each_node Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-07 17:12 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-07 17:12 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [PATCH v2 07/10] xen/arm: make process_memory_node a device_tree_node_func Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-01 9:47 ` Julien Grall [this message] 2019-05-01 9:47 ` Julien Grall 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [PATCH v2 08/10] xen/arm: keep track of reserved-memory regions Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-01 10:03 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-01 10:03 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-06-21 23:47 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-07 17:21 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-07 17:21 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [PATCH v2 09/10] xen/arm: map reserved-memory regions as normal memory in dom0 Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-07 19:52 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-07 19:52 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [PATCH v2 10/10] xen/arm: add reserved-memory regions to the dom0 memory node Stefano Stabellini 2019-04-30 21:02 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-07 20:15 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-07 20:15 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-05-10 20:51 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-10 20:51 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-10 21:43 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-10 21:43 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-05-11 12:40 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-11 12:40 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-05-20 21:26 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-20 21:26 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-20 22:38 ` Julien Grall 2019-05-20 22:38 ` [Xen-devel] " Julien Grall 2019-06-05 16:30 ` Julien Grall 2019-06-21 23:47 ` Stefano Stabellini 2019-05-16 16:52 ` [PATCH v2 0/10] iomem memory policy Oleksandr 2019-05-16 16:52 ` [Xen-devel] " Oleksandr 2019-06-21 23:48 ` Stefano Stabellini
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=8448a1f5-75de-123b-b496-bdc9b99826b2@arm.com \ --to=julien.grall@arm.com \ --cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \ --cc=stefanos@xilinx.com \ --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: linkBe 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).