Hi Julien,
> On 24 Sep 2024, at 19:31, Julien Grall <jul...@xen.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Bertrand,
>
> On 24/09/2024 09:16, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>>> On 22 Sep 2024, at 11:07, Julien Grall <jul...@xen.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 19/09/2024 14:19, Bertrand Marquis wrote:
>>>> Store the list of ABI we need in a list and go through the list instead
>>>> of having a list of conditions inside the code.
>>>> No functional change.
>>>> Signed-off-by: Bertrand Marquis <bertrand.marq...@arm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> xen/arch/arm/tee/ffa.c | 61 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>>>> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/tee/ffa.c b/xen/arch/arm/tee/ffa.c
>>>> index 7c84aa6aa43d..7ff2529b2055 100644
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/tee/ffa.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/tee/ffa.c
>>>> @@ -74,6 +74,24 @@
>>>> /* Negotiated FF-A version to use with the SPMC, 0 if not there or
>>>> supported */
>>>> static uint32_t __ro_after_init ffa_fw_version;
>>>> +/* List of ABI we use from the firmware */
>>>> +static const uint32_t ffa_fw_feat_needed[] = {
>>>> + FFA_VERSION,
>>>> + FFA_FEATURES,
>>>> + FFA_NOTIFICATION_BITMAP_CREATE,
>>>> + FFA_NOTIFICATION_BITMAP_DESTROY,
>>>> + FFA_PARTITION_INFO_GET,
>>>> + FFA_NOTIFICATION_INFO_GET_64,
>>>> + FFA_NOTIFICATION_GET,
>>>> + FFA_RX_RELEASE,
>>>> + FFA_RXTX_MAP_64,
>>>> + FFA_RXTX_UNMAP,
>>>> + FFA_MEM_SHARE_32,
>>>> + FFA_MEM_SHARE_64,
>>>> + FFA_MEM_RECLAIM,
>>>> + FFA_MSG_SEND_DIRECT_REQ_32,
>>>> + FFA_MSG_SEND_DIRECT_REQ_64,
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> NIT: As we are creating an array, could be take the opportunity to provide
>>> a name for each feature (we could use macro for that)? This would make
>>> easier for the user to know which feature is missing.
>> In fact those are not "features" per say but ABI we need to use with the
>> firmware so maybe i should first rename the variable to say abi instead of
>> feat.
>
> Thanks for the clarification! With that in mind...
>
>> Now we could create some features out of those as in practice several ABIs
>> are needed to be able to use one feature (for example notifications support
>> require the INFO_GET and the GET).
>> In your mind you wanted to have something like:
>> "Version", FFA_VERSION
>> "Direct Messages", FFA_MSG_SEND_DIRECT_REQ_32,
>> "Direct Messages", FFA_MSG_SEND_DIRECT_REQ_64
>> So that we could print a more meaningfull name or would you be ok with just
>> printing "FFA_MSG_SEND_DIRECT_REQ_32" ?
>
> ... I was more thinking about printing which ABI is missing. This is more
> helpful to the user than knowning which features will be missing.
>
> This has also the advantage that we can use macro to generate the names.
Ok then i will build a table of strings of the ABI names and use that to say
what ABI is not supported when there is one.
Cheers
Bertrand
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Julien Grall
>
