Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support
Hi All,
Great thanks for all your help :-)
On 25 April 2016 at 23:25, Stefano Stabellini 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
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support
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
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support
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: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support
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
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: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support
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
> >
> > 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
> 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
> Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson
> Release-acked-by: Wei Liu
> ---
> 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
> + 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
[Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] docs/arm64: update the documention for loading XSM support
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
>
> 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
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
Signed-off-by: Ian Jackson
Release-acked-by: Wei Liu
---
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
