On 31.10.2025 14:08, Grygorii Strashko wrote: > Hi Jan, > > On 30.10.25 14:10, Jan Beulich wrote: >> Arm's arch_domain_soft_reset() returning -ENOSYS is quite unhelpful: This >> way a domain will be crashed if a tool stack mistakenly invokes >> XEN_DOMCTL_soft_reset on it. Instead the tool stack should be told of its >> mistake. >> >> Introduce HAS_SOFT_RESET, implied only by x86. "imply" rather than >> "select" such that HAS_SOFT_RESET can later gain a dependency on >> MGMT_HYPERCALLS. That way HAS_SOFT_RESET will go off when >> MGMT_HYPERCALLS is off. >> >> Check the new setting early in domctl handling, and compile out the thus >> dead (when HAS_SOFT_RESET=n) domain_soft_reset() as well as its dedicated >> helpers. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]> >> > > Thank you for your patch. > > Reviewed-by: Grygorii Strashko <[email protected]>
Thanks. > But one question - soft_reset is applicable for domain, so wouldn't it > be better to note that in Kconfig option name: > > HAS_DOMAIN_SOFT_RESET I thought that "soft reset" is (going to remain) pretty unambiguous without the "domain". If (in particular) other REST maintainers think differently, I'm open to change the name. Generally my aim is to prefer reasonably short names for variables and alike, as long as no ambiguity arises. Jan
