On Tue, 19 Sept, 2023, 6:34 pm Harsh Prateek Bora, <harsh.prateek.bora@gmail.com
<mailto:harsh.prateek.bora@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Tue, 19 Sept, 2023, 4:37 pm Cédric Le Goater, <clg@kaod.org
<mailto:clg@kaod.org>> wrote:
On 9/19/23 09:28, Harsh Prateek Bora wrote:
>
>
> On 9/18/23 20:28, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>> Introduce a helper routine defining one CPU device node to fix this
>> warning :
>>
>> ../hw/ppc/spapr.c: In function ‘spapr_dt_cpus’:
>> ../hw/ppc/spapr.c:812:19: warning: declaration of ‘cs’ shadows a
previous local [-Wshadow=compatible-local]
>> 812 | CPUState *cs = rev[i];
>> | ^~
>> ../hw/ppc/spapr.c:786:15: note: shadowed declaration is here
>> 786 | CPUState *cs;
>> | ^~
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org <mailto:clg@kaod.org>>
>> ---
>> hw/ppc/spapr.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------
>> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/spapr.c b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
>> index de3c616b4637..d89f0fd496b6 100644
>> --- a/hw/ppc/spapr.c
>> +++ b/hw/ppc/spapr.c
>> @@ -780,6 +780,26 @@ static void spapr_dt_cpu(CPUState *cs, void
*fdt, int offset,
>> pcc->lrg_decr_bits)));
>> }
>> +static void spapr_dt_one_cpu(void *fdt, SpaprMachineState *spapr,
CPUState *cs,
>> + int cpus_offset)
>> +{
>> + PowerPCCPU *cpu = POWERPC_CPU(cs);
>> + int index = spapr_get_vcpu_id(cpu);
>> + DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_GET_CLASS(cs);
>> + g_autofree char *nodename = NULL;
>> + int offset;
>> +
>> + if (!spapr_is_thread0_in_vcore(spapr, cpu)) {
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + nodename = g_strdup_printf("%s@%x", dc->fw_name, index);
>> + offset = fdt_add_subnode(fdt, cpus_offset, nodename);
>> + _FDT(offset);
>> + spapr_dt_cpu(cs, fdt, offset, spapr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +
>> static void spapr_dt_cpus(void *fdt, SpaprMachineState *spapr)
>> {
>> CPUState **rev;
>> @@ -809,21 +829,7 @@ static void spapr_dt_cpus(void *fdt,
SpaprMachineState *spapr)
>> }
>> for (i = n_cpus - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
>> - CPUState *cs = rev[i];
>> - PowerPCCPU *cpu = POWERPC_CPU(cs);
>> - int index = spapr_get_vcpu_id(cpu);
>> - DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_GET_CLASS(cs);
>> - g_autofree char *nodename = NULL;
>> - int offset;
>> -
>> - if (!spapr_is_thread0_in_vcore(spapr, cpu)) {
>> - continue;
>> - }
>> -
>> - nodename = g_strdup_printf("%s@%x", dc->fw_name, index);
>> - offset = fdt_add_subnode(fdt, cpus_offset, nodename);
>> - _FDT(offset);
>> - spapr_dt_cpu(cs, fdt, offset, spapr);
>> + spapr_dt_one_cpu(fdt, spapr, rev[i], cpus_offset);
>
> Do we want to replace the call to spapr_dt_cpu in
> spapr_core_dt_populate() with the _one_ as well?
> Not sure about the implication of additional instructions there.
yeah may be we could rework spapr_dt_one_cpu() and
spapr_core_dt_populate()
in a single routine. They are similar. It can come later.
> Also, could this code insider wrapper become part of spapr_dt_cpu()
itself?
> If can't, do we want a better renaming of wrapper here?
I am open to proposal :)
How about spapr_dt_cpu_prepare() ?
I guess spapr_dt_cpu_process() may be more apt since it calls the spapr_dt_cpu
internally.