xen/arch/arm/traps.c | 57 -------------------------------------------- 1 file changed, 57 deletions(-)
The function in question has no callers and its removal has already
been proposed (and acked) as part of this larger series [1].
There have been further bugfixes to that function [2], but they do not add
any caller, hence it can be removed.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/1395766541-23979-27-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20160720161017.4508-1-jtd@galois.com/
Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com>
Suggested-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org>
---
xen/arch/arm/traps.c | 57 --------------------------------------------
1 file changed, 57 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/traps.c b/xen/arch/arm/traps.c
index 7baddfdc57b3..46c9a4031b30 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/traps.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/traps.c
@@ -1686,63 +1686,6 @@ void handle_ro_raz(struct cpu_user_regs *regs,
handle_ro_read_val(regs, regidx, read, hsr, min_el, 0);
}
-void dump_guest_s1_walk(struct domain *d, vaddr_t addr)
-{
- register_t ttbcr = READ_SYSREG(TCR_EL1);
- uint64_t ttbr0 = READ_SYSREG64(TTBR0_EL1);
- uint32_t offset;
- uint32_t *first = NULL, *second = NULL;
- mfn_t mfn;
-
- mfn = gfn_to_mfn(d, gaddr_to_gfn(ttbr0));
-
- printk("dom%d VA 0x%08"PRIvaddr"\n", d->domain_id, addr);
- printk(" TTBCR: 0x%"PRIregister"\n", ttbcr);
- printk(" TTBR0: 0x%016"PRIx64" = 0x%"PRIpaddr"\n",
- ttbr0, mfn_to_maddr(mfn));
-
- if ( ttbcr & TTBCR_EAE )
- {
- printk("Cannot handle LPAE guest PT walk\n");
- return;
- }
- if ( (ttbcr & TTBCR_N_MASK) != 0 )
- {
- printk("Cannot handle TTBR1 guest walks\n");
- return;
- }
-
- if ( mfn_eq(mfn, INVALID_MFN) )
- {
- printk("Failed TTBR0 maddr lookup\n");
- goto done;
- }
- first = map_domain_page(mfn);
-
- offset = addr >> (12+8);
- printk("1ST[0x%"PRIx32"] (0x%"PRIpaddr") = 0x%08"PRIx32"\n",
- offset, mfn_to_maddr(mfn), first[offset]);
- if ( !(first[offset] & 0x1) ||
- (first[offset] & 0x2) )
- goto done;
-
- mfn = gfn_to_mfn(d, gaddr_to_gfn(first[offset]));
-
- if ( mfn_eq(mfn, INVALID_MFN) )
- {
- printk("Failed L1 entry maddr lookup\n");
- goto done;
- }
- second = map_domain_page(mfn);
- offset = (addr >> 12) & 0x3FF;
- printk("2ND[0x%"PRIx32"] (0x%"PRIpaddr") = 0x%08"PRIx32"\n",
- offset, mfn_to_maddr(mfn), second[offset]);
-
-done:
- if ( second ) unmap_domain_page(second);
- if ( first ) unmap_domain_page(first);
-}
-
/*
* Return the value of the hypervisor fault address register.
*
--
2.34.1Hi, On 10/08/2023 10:29, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > The function in question has no callers and its removal has already > been proposed (and acked) as part of this larger series [1]. This is useful information after for the reviewer to know it was already acked, but it is not really past commit. So I would move it after ---. > There have been further bugfixes to that function [2], but they do not add > any caller, hence it can be removed. If you want to mention bugfixes, then it is best to refer to a commit rather than the e-mail thread. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/1395766541-23979-27-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20160720161017.4508-1-jtd@galois.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com> > Suggested-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> Aside the e-mail address, you want to order tag in chronogical order. This was suggested by me then you wrote the patch. So it Suggested-by should be first. Other than that, I would like Bertrand/Stefano to confirm if they are Ok with the removal. Cheers, -- Julien Grall
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi, > > On 10/08/2023 10:29, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > > The function in question has no callers and its removal has already > > been proposed (and acked) as part of this larger series [1]. > > This is useful information after for the reviewer to know it was already > acked, but it is not really past commit. So I would move it after ---. > > > There have been further bugfixes to that function [2], but they do not add > > any caller, hence it can be removed. > > If you want to mention bugfixes, then it is best to refer to a commit rather > than the e-mail thread. > > > > > [1] > > https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/1395766541-23979-27-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org/ > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20160720161017.4508-1-jtd@galois.com/ > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com> > > Suggested-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> > > Aside the e-mail address, you want to order tag in chronogical order. This was > suggested by me then you wrote the patch. So it Suggested-by should be first. > > Other than that, I would like Bertrand/Stefano to confirm if they are Ok with > the removal. Fine by me
On 10/08/2023 11:29, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > The function in question has no callers and its removal has already > been proposed (and acked) as part of this larger series [1]. > There have been further bugfixes to that function [2], but they do not > add > any caller, hence it can be removed. > > [1] > https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/1395766541-23979-27-git-send-email-julien.grall@linaro.org/ > [2] > https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20160720161017.4508-1-jtd@galois.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com> > Suggested-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@linaro.org> > --- Wrong mail address for Julien, sorry -- Nicola Vetrini, BSc Software Engineer, BUGSENG srl (https://bugseng.com)
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.