On 19.06.2025 08:43, Penny, Zheng wrote:
> [Public]
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2025 12:10 AM
>> To: Penny, Zheng <penny.zh...@amd.com>
>> Cc: Huang, Ray <ray.hu...@amd.com>; Andrew Cooper
>> <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>; Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com>;
>> Anthony PERARD <anthony.per...@vates.tech>; Orzel, Michal
>> <michal.or...@amd.com>; Julien Grall <jul...@xen.org>; Stefano Stabellini
>> <sstabell...@kernel.org>; xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/18] xen/cpufreq: introduce new sub-hypercall to
>> propagate CPPC data
>>
>> On 27.05.2025 10:48, Penny Zheng wrote:
>>> @@ -635,6 +641,124 @@ out:
>>> --- a/xen/include/public/platform.h
>>> +++ b/xen/include/public/platform.h
>>> @@ -363,6 +363,7 @@ DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xenpf_getidletime_t);
>>> +struct xen_processor_cppc {
>>> + uint8_t flags; /* flag for CPPC sub info type */
>>
>> A common way of commenting on such would be /* XEN_CPPC_... */.
>>
>> In any event, here and ...
>>
>>> + uint8_t pad[3]; /* padding and must be zero */
>>
>> ... here (and of course anywhere else) - please adhere to designated comment
>> style.
>
> Apart from Capital for the first letter, do designated comment style include
> format like: IN/OUT: xxx?
Comment style applies everywhere; the IN/OUT annotations in public headers are
generally desirable to have imo, yet for a padding field I'm not quite seeing
a need for such (if the caller passes in zeroes, the field will stay zeroed
unless the hypervisor actively altered the contents; IOW such fields simply
need to be zero at all times).
Jan
