Add support to load Dom0 boot modules from
the device tree using the uefi,binary property.
Update documentation about that.
Signed-off-by: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@arm.com>
---
Changes in v3:
- new patch
---
docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt | 8 ++++
docs/misc/efi.pandoc | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--
xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h | 36 +++++++++++++--
xen/common/efi/boot.c | 12 ++---
4 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
index 354bb43fe1..e73f6476d4 100644
--- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
+++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
@@ -70,6 +70,14 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
priority of this field vs. other mechanisms of specifying the
bootargs for the kernel.
+- uefi,binary (UEFI boot only)
+
+ String property that specifies the file name to be loaded by the UEFI
+ boot for this module. If this is specified, there is no need to specify
+ the reg property because it will be created by the UEFI stub on boot.
+ This option is needed only when UEFI boot is used, the node needs to be
+ compatible with multiboot,kernel or multiboot,ramdisk.
+
Examples
========
diff --git a/docs/misc/efi.pandoc b/docs/misc/efi.pandoc
index 800e67a233..4cebc47a18 100644
--- a/docs/misc/efi.pandoc
+++ b/docs/misc/efi.pandoc
@@ -167,6 +167,28 @@ sbsign \
--output xen.signed.efi \
xen.unified.efi
```
+## UEFI boot and Dom0 modules on ARM
+
+When booting using UEFI on ARM, it is possible to specify the Dom0 modules
+directly from the device tree without using the Xen configuration file, here an
+example:
+
+chosen {
+ #size-cells = <0x1>;
+ #address-cells = <0x1>;
+ xen,xen-bootargs = "[Xen boot arguments]"
+
+ module@1 {
+ compatible = "multiboot,kernel", "multiboot,module";
+ uefi,binary = "vmlinuz-3.0.31-0.4-xen";
+ bootargs = "[domain 0 command line options]";
+ };
+
+ module@2 {
+ compatible = "multiboot,ramdisk", "multiboot,module";
+ uefi,binary = "initrd-3.0.31-0.4-xen";
+ };
+}
## UEFI boot and dom0less on ARM
@@ -326,10 +348,10 @@ chosen {
### Boot Xen, Dom0 and DomU(s)
This configuration is a mix of the two configuration above, to boot this one
-the configuration file must be processed so the /chosen node must have the
-"uefi,cfg-load" property.
+the configuration file can be processed or the Dom0 modules can be read from
+the device tree.
-Here an example:
+Here the first example:
Xen configuration file:
@@ -369,4 +391,40 @@ chosen {
};
```
+Here the second example:
+
+Device tree:
+
+```
+chosen {
+ #size-cells = <0x1>;
+ #address-cells = <0x1>;
+ xen,xen-bootargs = "[Xen boot arguments]"
+
+ module@1 {
+ compatible = "multiboot,kernel", "multiboot,module";
+ uefi,binary = "vmlinuz-3.0.31-0.4-xen";
+ bootargs = "[domain 0 command line options]";
+ };
+
+ module@2 {
+ compatible = "multiboot,ramdisk", "multiboot,module";
+ uefi,binary = "initrd-3.0.31-0.4-xen";
+ };
+
+ domU1 {
+ #size-cells = <0x1>;
+ #address-cells = <0x1>;
+ compatible = "xen,domain";
+ cpus = <0x1>;
+ memory = <0x0 0xc0000>;
+ vpl011;
+ module@1 {
+ compatible = "multiboot,kernel", "multiboot,module";
+ uefi,binary = "Image-domu1.bin";
+ bootargs = "console=ttyAMA0 root=/dev/ram0 rw";
+ };
+ };
+};
+```
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h b/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h
index 4f7c913f86..df63387136 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h
@@ -31,8 +31,10 @@ static unsigned int __initdata modules_idx;
#define ERROR_MISSING_DT_PROPERTY (-3)
#define ERROR_RENAME_MODULE_NAME (-4)
#define ERROR_SET_REG_PROPERTY (-5)
+#define ERROR_DOM0_ALREADY_FOUND (-6)
#define ERROR_DT_MODULE_DOMU (-1)
#define ERROR_DT_CHOSEN_NODE (-2)
+#define ERROR_DT_MODULE_DOM0 (-3)
void noreturn efi_xen_start(void *fdt_ptr, uint32_t fdt_size);
void __flush_dcache_area(const void *vaddr, unsigned long size);
@@ -45,7 +47,8 @@ static int allocate_module_file(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
static int handle_module_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
int module_node_offset,
int reg_addr_cells,
- int reg_size_cells);
+ int reg_size_cells,
+ bool is_domu_module);
static bool is_boot_module(int dt_module_offset);
static int handle_dom0less_domain_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
int domain_node);
@@ -701,7 +704,8 @@ static int __init allocate_module_file(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
static int __init handle_module_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
int module_node_offset,
int reg_addr_cells,
- int reg_size_cells)
+ int reg_size_cells,
+ bool is_domu_module)
{
const void *uefi_name_prop;
char mod_string[24]; /* Placeholder for module@ + a 64-bit number + \0 */
@@ -743,6 +747,24 @@ static int __init handle_module_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
return ERROR_SET_REG_PROPERTY;
}
+ if ( !is_domu_module &&
+ (fdt_node_check_compatible(fdt, module_node_offset,
+ "multiboot,kernel") == 0) )
+ {
+ /*
+ * This is the Dom0 kernel, wire it to the kernel variable because it
+ * will be verified by the shim lock protocol later in the common code.
+ */
+ if ( kernel.addr )
+ {
+ PrintMessage(L"Dom0 kernel already found in cfg file.");
+ return ERROR_DOM0_ALREADY_FOUND;
+ }
+ kernel.need_to_free = false; /* Freed using the module array */
+ kernel.addr = file->addr;
+ kernel.size = file->size;
+ }
+
return 0;
}
@@ -799,7 +821,7 @@ static int __init handle_dom0less_domain_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
if ( is_boot_module(module_node) )
{
int ret = handle_module_node(dir_handle, module_node, addr_cells,
- size_cells);
+ size_cells, true);
if ( ret < 0 )
return ret;
}
@@ -809,7 +831,7 @@ static int __init handle_dom0less_domain_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
/*
* This function checks for xen domain nodes under the /chosen node for possible
- * domU guests to be loaded.
+ * dom0 and domU guests to be loaded.
* Returns the number of modules loaded or a negative number for error.
*/
static int __init efi_arch_check_dt_boot(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle)
@@ -836,6 +858,12 @@ static int __init efi_arch_check_dt_boot(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle)
if ( handle_dom0less_domain_node(dir_handle, node) < 0 )
return ERROR_DT_MODULE_DOMU;
}
+ else if ( is_boot_module(node) )
+ {
+ if ( handle_module_node(dir_handle, node, addr_len, size_len,
+ false) < 0 )
+ return ERROR_DT_MODULE_DOM0;
+ }
}
/* Free dom0less file names if any */
diff --git a/xen/common/efi/boot.c b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
index c8c57fbb54..b221494a06 100644
--- a/xen/common/efi/boot.c
+++ b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
@@ -1296,11 +1296,6 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
{
read_file(dir_handle, s2w(&name), &kernel, option_str);
efi_bs->FreePool(name.w);
-
- if ( !EFI_ERROR(efi_bs->LocateProtocol(&shim_lock_guid, NULL,
- (void **)&shim_lock)) &&
- (status = shim_lock->Verify(kernel.ptr, kernel.size)) != EFI_SUCCESS )
- PrintErrMesg(L"Dom0 kernel image could not be verified", status);
}
if ( !read_section(loaded_image, L"ramdisk", &ramdisk, NULL) )
@@ -1372,6 +1367,13 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
if (dt_module_found < 0)
/* efi_arch_check_dt_boot throws some error */
blexit(L"Error processing boot modules on DT.");
+
+ /* If Dom0 is specified, verify it */
+ if ( kernel.ptr &&
+ !EFI_ERROR(efi_bs->LocateProtocol(&shim_lock_guid, NULL,
+ (void **)&shim_lock)) &&
+ (status = shim_lock->Verify(kernel.ptr, kernel.size)) != EFI_SUCCESS )
+ PrintErrMesg(L"Dom0 kernel image could not be verified", status);
/*
* Check if a proper configuration is provided to start Xen:
* - Dom0 specified (minimum required)
--
2.17.1
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> Add support to load Dom0 boot modules from
> the device tree using the uefi,binary property.
>
> Update documentation about that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luca Fancellu <luca.fancellu@arm.com>
It is great how simple this patch is!
The patch looks all correct. Only one question: do we need a check to
make sure the dom0 ramdisk is not loaded twice? Once via uefi,binary and
another time via the config file? In other words...
> ---
> Changes in v3:
> - new patch
> ---
> docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt | 8 ++++
> docs/misc/efi.pandoc | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h | 36 +++++++++++++--
> xen/common/efi/boot.c | 12 ++---
> 4 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> index 354bb43fe1..e73f6476d4 100644
> --- a/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> +++ b/docs/misc/arm/device-tree/booting.txt
> @@ -70,6 +70,14 @@ Each node contains the following properties:
> priority of this field vs. other mechanisms of specifying the
> bootargs for the kernel.
>
> +- uefi,binary (UEFI boot only)
> +
> + String property that specifies the file name to be loaded by the UEFI
> + boot for this module. If this is specified, there is no need to specify
> + the reg property because it will be created by the UEFI stub on boot.
> + This option is needed only when UEFI boot is used, the node needs to be
> + compatible with multiboot,kernel or multiboot,ramdisk.
> +
> Examples
> ========
>
> diff --git a/docs/misc/efi.pandoc b/docs/misc/efi.pandoc
> index 800e67a233..4cebc47a18 100644
> --- a/docs/misc/efi.pandoc
> +++ b/docs/misc/efi.pandoc
> @@ -167,6 +167,28 @@ sbsign \
> --output xen.signed.efi \
> xen.unified.efi
> ```
> +## UEFI boot and Dom0 modules on ARM
> +
> +When booting using UEFI on ARM, it is possible to specify the Dom0 modules
> +directly from the device tree without using the Xen configuration file, here an
> +example:
> +
> +chosen {
> + #size-cells = <0x1>;
> + #address-cells = <0x1>;
> + xen,xen-bootargs = "[Xen boot arguments]"
> +
> + module@1 {
> + compatible = "multiboot,kernel", "multiboot,module";
> + uefi,binary = "vmlinuz-3.0.31-0.4-xen";
> + bootargs = "[domain 0 command line options]";
> + };
> +
> + module@2 {
> + compatible = "multiboot,ramdisk", "multiboot,module";
> + uefi,binary = "initrd-3.0.31-0.4-xen";
> + };
> +}
>
> ## UEFI boot and dom0less on ARM
>
> @@ -326,10 +348,10 @@ chosen {
> ### Boot Xen, Dom0 and DomU(s)
>
> This configuration is a mix of the two configuration above, to boot this one
> -the configuration file must be processed so the /chosen node must have the
> -"uefi,cfg-load" property.
> +the configuration file can be processed or the Dom0 modules can be read from
> +the device tree.
>
> -Here an example:
> +Here the first example:
>
> Xen configuration file:
>
> @@ -369,4 +391,40 @@ chosen {
> };
> ```
>
> +Here the second example:
> +
> +Device tree:
> +
> +```
> +chosen {
> + #size-cells = <0x1>;
> + #address-cells = <0x1>;
> + xen,xen-bootargs = "[Xen boot arguments]"
> +
> + module@1 {
> + compatible = "multiboot,kernel", "multiboot,module";
> + uefi,binary = "vmlinuz-3.0.31-0.4-xen";
> + bootargs = "[domain 0 command line options]";
> + };
> +
> + module@2 {
> + compatible = "multiboot,ramdisk", "multiboot,module";
> + uefi,binary = "initrd-3.0.31-0.4-xen";
> + };
> +
> + domU1 {
> + #size-cells = <0x1>;
> + #address-cells = <0x1>;
> + compatible = "xen,domain";
> + cpus = <0x1>;
> + memory = <0x0 0xc0000>;
> + vpl011;
>
> + module@1 {
> + compatible = "multiboot,kernel", "multiboot,module";
> + uefi,binary = "Image-domu1.bin";
> + bootargs = "console=ttyAMA0 root=/dev/ram0 rw";
> + };
> + };
> +};
> +```
> diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h b/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h
> index 4f7c913f86..df63387136 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/efi/efi-boot.h
> @@ -31,8 +31,10 @@ static unsigned int __initdata modules_idx;
> #define ERROR_MISSING_DT_PROPERTY (-3)
> #define ERROR_RENAME_MODULE_NAME (-4)
> #define ERROR_SET_REG_PROPERTY (-5)
> +#define ERROR_DOM0_ALREADY_FOUND (-6)
> #define ERROR_DT_MODULE_DOMU (-1)
> #define ERROR_DT_CHOSEN_NODE (-2)
> +#define ERROR_DT_MODULE_DOM0 (-3)
>
> void noreturn efi_xen_start(void *fdt_ptr, uint32_t fdt_size);
> void __flush_dcache_area(const void *vaddr, unsigned long size);
> @@ -45,7 +47,8 @@ static int allocate_module_file(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
> static int handle_module_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
> int module_node_offset,
> int reg_addr_cells,
> - int reg_size_cells);
> + int reg_size_cells,
> + bool is_domu_module);
> static bool is_boot_module(int dt_module_offset);
> static int handle_dom0less_domain_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
> int domain_node);
> @@ -701,7 +704,8 @@ static int __init allocate_module_file(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
> static int __init handle_module_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
> int module_node_offset,
> int reg_addr_cells,
> - int reg_size_cells)
> + int reg_size_cells,
> + bool is_domu_module)
> {
> const void *uefi_name_prop;
> char mod_string[24]; /* Placeholder for module@ + a 64-bit number + \0 */
> @@ -743,6 +747,24 @@ static int __init handle_module_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
> return ERROR_SET_REG_PROPERTY;
> }
>
> + if ( !is_domu_module &&
> + (fdt_node_check_compatible(fdt, module_node_offset,
> + "multiboot,kernel") == 0) )
> + {
> + /*
> + * This is the Dom0 kernel, wire it to the kernel variable because it
> + * will be verified by the shim lock protocol later in the common code.
> + */
> + if ( kernel.addr )
> + {
> + PrintMessage(L"Dom0 kernel already found in cfg file.");
> + return ERROR_DOM0_ALREADY_FOUND;
> + }
> + kernel.need_to_free = false; /* Freed using the module array */
> + kernel.addr = file->addr;
> + kernel.size = file->size;
> + }
... is it necessary to update ramdisk as well or check if it is already
set? As far as I can tell it is the only other potential conflict that
we could have.
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -799,7 +821,7 @@ static int __init handle_dom0less_domain_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
> if ( is_boot_module(module_node) )
> {
> int ret = handle_module_node(dir_handle, module_node, addr_cells,
> - size_cells);
> + size_cells, true);
> if ( ret < 0 )
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -809,7 +831,7 @@ static int __init handle_dom0less_domain_node(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle,
>
> /*
> * This function checks for xen domain nodes under the /chosen node for possible
> - * domU guests to be loaded.
> + * dom0 and domU guests to be loaded.
> * Returns the number of modules loaded or a negative number for error.
> */
> static int __init efi_arch_check_dt_boot(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle)
> @@ -836,6 +858,12 @@ static int __init efi_arch_check_dt_boot(EFI_FILE_HANDLE dir_handle)
> if ( handle_dom0less_domain_node(dir_handle, node) < 0 )
> return ERROR_DT_MODULE_DOMU;
> }
> + else if ( is_boot_module(node) )
> + {
> + if ( handle_module_node(dir_handle, node, addr_len, size_len,
> + false) < 0 )
> + return ERROR_DT_MODULE_DOM0;
> + }
> }
>
> /* Free dom0less file names if any */
> diff --git a/xen/common/efi/boot.c b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> index c8c57fbb54..b221494a06 100644
> --- a/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> +++ b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> @@ -1296,11 +1296,6 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
> {
> read_file(dir_handle, s2w(&name), &kernel, option_str);
> efi_bs->FreePool(name.w);
> -
> - if ( !EFI_ERROR(efi_bs->LocateProtocol(&shim_lock_guid, NULL,
> - (void **)&shim_lock)) &&
> - (status = shim_lock->Verify(kernel.ptr, kernel.size)) != EFI_SUCCESS )
> - PrintErrMesg(L"Dom0 kernel image could not be verified", status);
> }
>
> if ( !read_section(loaded_image, L"ramdisk", &ramdisk, NULL) )
> @@ -1372,6 +1367,13 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
> if (dt_module_found < 0)
> /* efi_arch_check_dt_boot throws some error */
> blexit(L"Error processing boot modules on DT.");
> +
> + /* If Dom0 is specified, verify it */
> + if ( kernel.ptr &&
> + !EFI_ERROR(efi_bs->LocateProtocol(&shim_lock_guid, NULL,
> + (void **)&shim_lock)) &&
> + (status = shim_lock->Verify(kernel.ptr, kernel.size)) != EFI_SUCCESS )
> + PrintErrMesg(L"Dom0 kernel image could not be verified", status);
> /*
> * Check if a proper configuration is provided to start Xen:
> * - Dom0 specified (minimum required)
> --
> 2.17.1
>
On 28.09.2021 18:32, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> --- a/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> +++ b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
> @@ -1296,11 +1296,6 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
> {
> read_file(dir_handle, s2w(&name), &kernel, option_str);
> efi_bs->FreePool(name.w);
> -
> - if ( !EFI_ERROR(efi_bs->LocateProtocol(&shim_lock_guid, NULL,
> - (void **)&shim_lock)) &&
> - (status = shim_lock->Verify(kernel.ptr, kernel.size)) != EFI_SUCCESS )
> - PrintErrMesg(L"Dom0 kernel image could not be verified", status);
> }
>
> if ( !read_section(loaded_image, L"ramdisk", &ramdisk, NULL) )
> @@ -1372,6 +1367,13 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
> if (dt_module_found < 0)
> /* efi_arch_check_dt_boot throws some error */
> blexit(L"Error processing boot modules on DT.");
> +
> + /* If Dom0 is specified, verify it */
> + if ( kernel.ptr &&
> + !EFI_ERROR(efi_bs->LocateProtocol(&shim_lock_guid, NULL,
> + (void **)&shim_lock)) &&
> + (status = shim_lock->Verify(kernel.ptr, kernel.size)) != EFI_SUCCESS )
> + PrintErrMesg(L"Dom0 kernel image could not be verified", status);
Why does this code need moving in the first place? That's (to me at least)
not obvious from looking just at the common (i.e. non-Arm-specific) part.
Hence I would wish for the comment to be slightly extended to indicate
that the kernel image may also have been loaded by <whichever function>.
Also, two nits: You've broken indentation here (you've lost a space too
much compared to the original code) and ...
> /*
> * Check if a proper configuration is provided to start Xen:
> * - Dom0 specified (minimum required)
>
... you will want to insert a blank line not only before, but also after
your insertion (or, imo less desirable, neither of the two blank lines).
Further I wonder whether your addition wouldn't better be after the code
following this comment.
And finally I wonder (looking back at the earlier patch) why you use
kernel.addr there when kernel.ptr is being used here. Unless there's a
reason for the difference, being consistent would be better.
Jan
> On 29 Sep 2021, at 09:00, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
> On 28.09.2021 18:32, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>> --- a/xen/common/efi/boot.c
>> +++ b/xen/common/efi/boot.c
>> @@ -1296,11 +1296,6 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
>> {
>> read_file(dir_handle, s2w(&name), &kernel, option_str);
>> efi_bs->FreePool(name.w);
>> -
>> - if ( !EFI_ERROR(efi_bs->LocateProtocol(&shim_lock_guid, NULL,
>> - (void **)&shim_lock)) &&
>> - (status = shim_lock->Verify(kernel.ptr, kernel.size)) != EFI_SUCCESS )
>> - PrintErrMesg(L"Dom0 kernel image could not be verified", status);
>> }
>>
>> if ( !read_section(loaded_image, L"ramdisk", &ramdisk, NULL) )
>> @@ -1372,6 +1367,13 @@ efi_start(EFI_HANDLE ImageHandle, EFI_SYSTEM_TABLE *SystemTable)
>> if (dt_module_found < 0)
>> /* efi_arch_check_dt_boot throws some error */
>> blexit(L"Error processing boot modules on DT.");
>> +
>> + /* If Dom0 is specified, verify it */
>> + if ( kernel.ptr &&
>> + !EFI_ERROR(efi_bs->LocateProtocol(&shim_lock_guid, NULL,
>> + (void **)&shim_lock)) &&
>> + (status = shim_lock->Verify(kernel.ptr, kernel.size)) != EFI_SUCCESS )
>> + PrintErrMesg(L"Dom0 kernel image could not be verified", status);
>
> Why does this code need moving in the first place? That's (to me at least)
> not obvious from looking just at the common (i.e. non-Arm-specific) part.
> Hence I would wish for the comment to be slightly extended to indicate
> that the kernel image may also have been loaded by <whichever function>.
>
Sure I will improve the comment to explain that.
> Also, two nits: You've broken indentation here (you've lost a space too
> much compared to the original code) and ...
Yes sorry for that, we didn’t see it, I will fix it.
>
>> /*
>> * Check if a proper configuration is provided to start Xen:
>> * - Dom0 specified (minimum required)
>>
>
> ... you will want to insert a blank line not only before, but also after
> your insertion (or, imo less desirable, neither of the two blank lines).
>
> Further I wonder whether your addition wouldn't better be after the code
> following this comment.
>
> And finally I wonder (looking back at the earlier patch) why you use
> kernel.addr there when kernel.ptr is being used here. Unless there's a
> reason for the difference, being consistent would be better.
I will do all of the above for the v4.
Thanks for all the feedbacks.
Cheers,
Luca
>
> Jan
>
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.