> On 14 Apr 2021, at 14:45, Julien Grall <jul...@xen.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Luca,
>
> On 14/04/2021 12:29, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>>> On 14 Apr 2021, at 12:16, Julien Grall <jul...@xen.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Luca,
>>>
>>> On 14/04/2021 10:14, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>>>> Among the common and arm codebase there are few cases where
>>>> the hardware_domain variable is checked to see if the current
>>>> domain is equal to the hardware_domain, change this cases to
>>>> use is_hardware_domain() function instead. >
>>>> Signed-off-by: Luca Fancellu <luca.fance...@arm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> v4 changes:
>>>> - removed unneeded check for domain NULL from is_hardware_domain
>>>> introduced in v3
>>>
>>> After this change, this patch is only avoid to open-code
>>> is_hardware_domain(). Although, it adds an extra speculation barrier.
>>>
>>> I am not against the change, however I think the commit message needs to
>>> updated to match what the patch is doing.
>>>
>>> Can you propose a new commit message?
>> Hi Julien,
>> Yes I agree, what about:
>> xen/arm: Reinforce use of is_hardware_domain
>> Among the common and arm codebase there are few cases where
>
> I would drop 'common' because you are only modifying the arm codebase.
>
>> the hardware_domain variable is checked to see if the current
>> domain is equal to the hardware_domain, change this cases to
>> use is_hardware_domain() function instead.
>
>
>> In the eventuality that hardware_domain is NULL, is_hardware_domain
>> will return false because an analysis of the common and arm codebase
>> shows that is_hardware_domain is called always with a non NULL
>> domain pointer.
>
> This paragraph seems to come out of the blue. I would drop it.
>
> How about:
>
> "
> There are a few places on Arm where we use pretty much an open-coded version
> of is_hardware_domain(). The main difference, is the helper will also block
> speculation (not yet implemented on Arm).
>
> The existing users are not in hot path, so blocking speculation would not
> hurt when it is implemented. So remove the open-coded version within the arm
> codebase.
> "
>
> If you are happy with the commit message, I will commit it the series
> tomorrow (to give an opportunity to Stefano to review).
>
Hi Julien,
Yes your version is much better, thank you very much!
Cheers,
Luca
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Julien Grall
