On 16.12.2021 18:36, Oleksii Moisieiev wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 10:41:30AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 14.12.2021 10:34, Oleksii Moisieiev wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/include/public/domctl.h
>>> +++ b/xen/include/public/domctl.h
>>> @@ -1177,6 +1177,13 @@ struct xen_domctl_vmtrace_op {
>>> #define XEN_DOMCTL_vmtrace_get_option 5
>>> #define XEN_DOMCTL_vmtrace_set_option 6
>>> };
>>> +
>>> +/* XEN_DOMCTL_add_sci_device: set sci device permissions */
>>> +struct xen_domctl_sci_device_op {
>>> + uint32_t size; /* Length of the path */
>>> + XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_64(char) path; /* path to the device tree node */
>>> +};
>>
>> This being - aiui - Arm-only, please enclose it by respective #if,
>> just like we do for certain x86-only ops.
>>
>
> I agree. I will add #ifdefs in v2.
>
>> I'm further afraid the term "SCI" is ambiguous with ACPI's System
>> Control Interrupt, so there's some further tag needed in the names
>> used here.
>>
>
> Thank you for remark. I'm thinking about SC as System Control.
> What do you think?
I guess "SC" could even more so stand for various things. Even the
spelled out "System Control" looks overly generic. If this isn't
Arm-specific (in which case adding "arm" into the name might at least
help the situation a little), then I guess some further disambiguation
is going to be wanted. Since I don't know any of the context of this,
I'm afraid you're in a far better position than me to come up with a
non-ambiguous name.
Jan
