Hi Jens, > On 22 Feb 2023, at 16:33, Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklan...@linaro.org> wrote: > > Adds defines for framework direct request/response messages. > > Signed-off-by: Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklan...@linaro.org> > --- > xen/arch/arm/tee/ffa.c | 9 +++++++++ > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/tee/ffa.c b/xen/arch/arm/tee/ffa.c > index f4562ed2defc..d04bac9cc47f 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/arm/tee/ffa.c > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/tee/ffa.c > @@ -56,6 +56,15 @@ > #define FFA_MY_VERSION MAKE_FFA_VERSION(FFA_MY_VERSION_MAJOR, \ > FFA_MY_VERSION_MINOR) > > +/* Framework direct request/response */
In the previous patch you were more verbose in the comment which was nice. I would suggest here to use the same "format": Flags used for the MSG_SEND_DIRECT_REQ/RESP: BIT(31): Framework or partition message BIT(7-0): Message type for frameworks messages > +#define FFA_MSG_FLAG_FRAMEWORK BIT(31, U) > +#define FFA_MSG_TYPE_MASK 0xFFU; Maybe more coherent to name this FFA_MSG_FLAG_TYPE_MASK ? I am a bit unsure here because we could also keep it like that and just add _TYPE to other definitions after. What do you think ? > +#define FFA_MSG_PSCI 0x0U > +#define FFA_MSG_SEND_VM_CREATED 0x4U > +#define FFA_MSG_RESP_VM_CREATED 0x5U > +#define FFA_MSG_SEND_VM_DESTROYED 0x6U > +#define FFA_MSG_RESP_VM_DESTROYED 0x7U > + > /* > * Flags used for the FFA_PARTITION_INFO_GET return message: > * BIT(0): Supports receipt of direct requests > -- > 2.34.1 > Cheers Bertrand
