[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-devel] Re: Shall we clear the cpumap in XEN_DOMCTL_setvcpuaffinity
It's in the staging tree http://xenbits.xensource.com/staging/xen-unstable.hg -- Keir On 12/05/2010 08:57, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Thanks, although "no changes found" after hg pull :-) > > --jyh > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] >> Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 3:43 PM >> To: Jiang, Yunhong >> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: Re: Shall we clear the cpumap in XEN_DOMCTL_setvcpuaffinity >> >> On 12/05/2010 08:22, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> When browse code, I noticed if the op->u.vcpuaffinity.cpumap is NULL, a >>> random >>> value of new_affinity will be passed to vcpu_set_affinity(), as in followed >>> code. >>> >>> I'm not sure if this is expected result. IMO, we should return -EINVAL if no >>> cpu specified, as the return value at vcpu_set_affinity() for empty cpumap. >> >> Xen-unstable:21350. >> >> Thanks, >> Keir >> >>> Did I missed anything? >>> >>> case XEN_DOMCTL_getvcpuaffinity: >>> { >>> domid_t dom = op->domain; >>> struct domain *d = rcu_lock_domain_by_id(dom); >>> struct vcpu *v; >>> cpumask_t new_affinity; >>> ...... >>> if ( op->cmd == XEN_DOMCTL_setvcpuaffinity ) >>> { >>> xenctl_cpumap_to_cpumask( >>>>> the new_affinity is not >>> initialized for if cpumap==NULL >>> &new_affinity, &op->u.vcpuaffinity.cpumap); >>> ret = vcpu_set_affinity(v, &new_affinity); >>> } >>> >>> Thanks >>> --jyh >> > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |