Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/3] xen/arm: vpsci: Move PSCI function dispatching from vsmc.c to vpsci.c

[Volodymyr Babchuk <volodymyr_babchuk@xxxxxxxx>]

On 31.01.18 16:54, Julien Grall wrote:

> > > On 31/01/18 11:32, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
> > > > > I thought about vpsci.h, but basically you will have only 2 
> > > > > functions in it and
> > > > > the number of PSCI calls. That's it.
> > > > Is  this really a problem? It is quite natural to find declarations 
> > > > for something.c in something.h. By moving declaration into different 
> > > > file, you are hiding it from anyone who does not carry sacred 
> > > > knowledge (or use grep/cscope, yes).
> > > > And then, when people decide to extend something.c they continue to 
> > > > put declarations into inappropriate.h. Just look at processor.h as a 
> > > > good example. All functions it define are implemented either in 
> > > > traps.c or domain.c. But functions from processor.c are defined in 
> > > > procinfo.h.
> > > > I can tell for sure, that this confuses newbies.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > So it is not going to help to update because the header will 
> > > > > unlikely need to
> > > > > change when adding new PSCI call.
> > > > Yes. But at least we can put comment above switch(fid):
> > > >
> > > > /* Please don't forget to update call count in (v)psci.h */
> > > See my answer on my own e-mail I sent few minutes ago. I said I will 
> > > create a the vpsci.h.
> > I can't find it anywhere. I even tried Markmail. Would you please 
> > point it to me?
> I wrote it somewhere and thought I sent but I can't find it :/. Sorry 
> for that.
Ah, I see. It is okay.

> I was saying after some thought, I will create a header vpsic.h with 
> number in it.
> I will also add a comment as you suggested.
Thanks. I'm fine with this.



--
Volodymyr Babchuk

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel