On 13.08.2026 17:39, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> On 8/4/26 5:48 PM, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
>> @@ -312,6 +318,35 @@ static int imsic_parse_node(const struct dt_device_node
>> *node,
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +int vcpu_imsic_init(struct vcpu *v)
>> +{
>> + struct vimsic_state *imsic_state;
>> +
>> + /* Allocate IMSIC context */
>> + imsic_state = xvzalloc(struct vimsic_state);
>> + if ( !imsic_state )
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + /* Setup IMSIC context */
>> + rwlock_init(&imsic_state->vsfile_lock);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * xvzalloc() already cleared the context, so guest_file_id == 0, i.e.
>> the
>> + * always-available s/w IMSIC VS-file. Only vsfile_pcpu needs an
>> explicit
>> + * initializer as its s/w VS-file value is NR_CPUS rather than 0.
>> + */
>> + imsic_state->vsfile_pcpu = NR_CPUS;
>> +
> Considering our conversation in another patch series vsfile_cpu would be
> better name. Don't you mind if I will change vsfile_pcpu -> vsfile_cpu
> and everywhere it is needed in this patch with saving of your Acked-by?
Such a rename won't invalidate my ack. What's important is that (here and/or
elsewhere) you make sure you only ever store CPU numbers there, not - like
you had it somewhere - hart IDs.
Jan
