Messages in this thread | | | From | JeeHeng Sia <> | Subject | RE: [RFT 1/2] RISC-V: handle missing "no-map" properties for OpenSBI's PMP protected regions | Date | Wed, 9 Aug 2023 10:24:57 +0000 |
| |
> -----Original Message----- > From: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> > Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2023 9:13 PM > To: JeeHeng Sia <jeeheng.sia@starfivetech.com> > Cc: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>; palmer@dabbelt.com; Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>; Atish Patra > <atishp@rivosinc.com>; Anup Patel <apatel@ventanamicro.com>; Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>; Björn Töpel > <bjorn@rivosinc.com>; Song Shuai <suagrfillet@gmail.com>; Petr Tesarik <petrtesarik@huaweicloud.com>; linux- > riscv@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; stable@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: [RFT 1/2] RISC-V: handle missing "no-map" properties for OpenSBI's PMP protected regions > > On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 12:44:07AM +0000, JeeHeng Sia wrote: > > > > +/* SBI implementation IDs */ > > > +#define SBI_IMP_OPENSBI 1 > > I would suggest to create an enum struct for the SBI Imp ID in > > the sbi.h file. What do you think? > > I'm not really sure what the advantage of doing so is. The macro SBI_IMP_OPENSBI seems weird (I would read it as "SBI Implementation OpenSBI"). However, if we implement an enum struct for SBI_IMP_ID (There are numerous IDs available), the macro can be abbreviated to OpenSBI. By doing this, the conditional checking of the implementation ID would be more readable, as shown below: if (sbi_firmware_id != OPENSBI)
| |