Hi,
On 06/03/2020 17:42, Anthony PERARD wrote:
We are going to move the generation of the early printk macro into
Kconfig. This means all macro will be prefix with CONFIG_. We do that
ahead of the change.
We also take the opportunity to better name some variables, which are
used by only one driver and wouldn't make sens for other UART driver.
Thus,
- EARLY_UART_REG_SHIFT became CONFIG_EARLY_UART_8250_REG_SHIFT
- EARLY_PRINTK_VERSION_* became CONFIG_EARLY_UART_SCIF_VERSION_*
The other variables are change to have the prefix CONFIG_EARLY_UART_
when they change a parameter of the driver. So we have now:
- CONFIG_EARLY_UART_BAUD_RATE
- CONFIG_EARLY_UART_BASE_ADDRESS
- CONFIG_EARLY_UART_INIT
We also reuse CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK provided by users to enable or not
early printk, thus we need to override the value in makefile.
Signed-off-by: Anthony PERARD <anthony.per...@citrix.com>
---
That's based on early work by Julien
[PATCH for-4.13] xen/arm: Add Skeleton for using configuring early printk
using Kconfig
<20190913103953.8182-1-julien.gr...@arm.com>
---
xen/arch/arm/Makefile | 2 +-
xen/arch/arm/Rules.mk | 20 +++++++++-----------
xen/arch/arm/arm32/Makefile | 2 +-
xen/arch/arm/arm32/debug-8250.inc | 2 +-
xen/arch/arm/arm32/debug-pl011.inc | 4 ++--
xen/arch/arm/arm32/debug-scif.inc | 4 ++--
xen/arch/arm/arm32/debug.S | 4 ++--
xen/arch/arm/arm32/head.S | 10 +++++-----
xen/arch/arm/arm64/Makefile | 2 +-
xen/arch/arm/arm64/debug-8250.inc | 4 ++--
xen/arch/arm/arm64/debug-pl011.inc | 4 ++--
xen/arch/arm/arm64/debug.S | 4 ++--
xen/arch/arm/arm64/head.S | 10 +++++-----
xen/include/asm-arm/early_printk.h | 2 +-
14 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
index 1044c2298a05..12f92a4bd3f9 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Makefile
@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ obj-y += device.o
obj-y += domain.o
obj-y += domain_build.init.o
obj-y += domctl.o
-obj-$(EARLY_PRINTK) += early_printk.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK) += early_printk.o
obj-y += gic.o
obj-y += gic-v2.o
obj-$(CONFIG_GICV3) += gic-v3.o
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/Rules.mk b/xen/arch/arm/Rules.mk
index 022a3a6f82ba..85f8a4c6f914 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/Rules.mk
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/Rules.mk
@@ -18,8 +18,6 @@ CFLAGS-$(CONFIG_ARM_32) += -mcpu=cortex-a15
CFLAGS-$(CONFIG_ARM_64) += -mcpu=generic
CFLAGS-$(CONFIG_ARM_64) += -mgeneral-regs-only # No fp registers etc
-EARLY_PRINTK := n
-
ifeq ($(CONFIG_DEBUG),y)
# See docs/misc/arm/early-printk.txt for syntax
@@ -66,22 +64,22 @@ endif
endif
ifeq ($(EARLY_PRINTK_INC),scif)
ifneq ($(word 3,$(EARLY_PRINTK_CFG)),)
-CFLAGS-y += -DEARLY_PRINTK_VERSION_$(word 3,$(EARLY_PRINTK_CFG))
+CFLAGS-y += -DCONFIG_EARLY_UART_SCIF_VERSION_$(word 3,$(EARLY_PRINTK_CFG))
else
-CFLAGS-y += -DEARLY_PRINTK_VERSION_NONE
+CFLAGS-y += -DCONFIG_EARLY_UART_SCIF_VERSION_NONE
endif
endif
ifneq ($(EARLY_PRINTK_INC),)
-EARLY_PRINTK := y
+override CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK := y
I am not sure to understand why you are using the directive override
here. Why can't you just prefix the variable with CONFIG_?
endif
-CFLAGS-$(EARLY_PRINTK) += -DCONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK
-CFLAGS-$(EARLY_PRINTK_INIT_UART) += -DEARLY_PRINTK_INIT_UART
-CFLAGS-$(EARLY_PRINTK) += -DEARLY_PRINTK_INC=\"debug-$(EARLY_PRINTK_INC).inc\"
-CFLAGS-$(EARLY_PRINTK) += -DEARLY_PRINTK_BAUD=$(EARLY_PRINTK_BAUD)
-CFLAGS-$(EARLY_PRINTK) += -DEARLY_UART_BASE_ADDRESS=$(EARLY_UART_BASE_ADDRESS)
-CFLAGS-$(EARLY_PRINTK) += -DEARLY_UART_REG_SHIFT=$(EARLY_UART_REG_SHIFT)
+CFLAGS-$(CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK) += -DCONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK
+CFLAGS-$(EARLY_PRINTK_INIT_UART) += -DCONFIG_EARLY_UART_INIT
+CFLAGS-$(CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK) +=
-DCONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK_INC=\"debug-$(EARLY_PRINTK_INC).inc\"
+CFLAGS-$(CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK) +=
-DCONFIG_EARLY_UART_BAUD_RATE=$(EARLY_PRINTK_BAUD)
The baud rate is only used by the PL011 in rare cases. So I would add
PL011 in the name.
+CFLAGS-$(CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK) +=
-DCONFIG_EARLY_UART_BASE_ADDRESS=$(EARLY_UART_BASE_ADDRESS)
+CFLAGS-$(CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK) +=
-DCONFIG_EARLY_UART_8250_REG_SHIFT=$(EARLY_UART_REG_SHIFT)
The name clearly suggests that this should be protected with an "if
8250". Maybe in the similar way as for the scif specific variables.
But... I am not going to push for it as the next patch is going to
remove it.
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
