On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 07:45:27PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 1 September 2015 at 18:45, Gabriel L. Somlo <so...@cmu.edu> wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 06:33:25PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > >> As an aside, shouldn't this function-level documentation be done > >> via doc-comments in the header file where the prototypes are > >> declared? (You don't need to move the docs around in this series, > >> but it might be nice to do at some point.) > > > > You mean, leave docs/specs/fw_cfg.txt to deal with the guest-side > > port/mmio api only, and have the host-side functions simply documented > > as comments in include/hw/nvram/fw_cfg.h ? > > > > That should be relatively painless, if that's the agreed-upon > > convention... > > Yes. I think at the point this file was written we probably hadn't > started using doc-comments for our APIs. (My usual place to crib > the formatting for doc-comments is the extract/deposit APIs in > bitops.h.)
OK, I guess I'll wait until after the dust settles on fw_cfg/DMA before further mucking with the doc or header files, but again, this shouldn't be too painless... Also, since I'll be tinkering with fw_cfg again, and you mentioned using DT on arm and ACPI on x86 to auto-detect the presence (and location) of fw_cfg from the guest-side in a related thread: Right now, I don't think fw_cfg is listed in ACPI, and I would like it to be. So what should I do, simply figure out how to add a new node somewhere in the SSDT and submit a patch for that ? Could it be that simple, or am I missing something ? :) Thanks, --Gabriel