Hello,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2026 4:08 PM
> To: Hirokazu Takahashi <taka@valinux.co.jp>
> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] xen/arm: Device Tree based CPU topology support
> 
> On 29.06.2026 23:58, Hirokazu Takahashi wrote:
> > Changes in v3:
> >  - Use (nr_cpu_ids - 1) as the maximum CPU ID here. The fix for the sparse
> >    map mismatch issue on ARM Xen has been split out into a separate
> patch.
> >  - Switch topology sibling masks to cpumask_var_t for dynamic allocation.
> >  - Allow the system to keep running with a degraded fallback even if
> >    the topology table allocation fails.
> >  - Remove the temporary definitions of cpu_to_core() and cpu_to_socket()
> >    from RISC-V and PPC processor.h.
> >  - Minimize the use of #ifdef blocks, leveraging compiler Dead Code
> >    Elimination (DCE) where possible.
> >  - Clean up the code to follow the Xen coding style. Please let me know
> >    if I missed any style nits!
> >  - Verify successful builds across x86, RISC-V, and PPC environments.
> 
> Having this here is better than nothing, but may I please ask that revlog
> information be per-patch? It's there where you look when reviewing
> individual patches, and having it separated also helps understand which
> item applies to which patch.

Understood. I will split the changelog/revlog entries.

Thank you for your advice.
Hirokazu Takahashi.