[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] dump_p2m_table: For IOMMU
Why do you do this differently than for VT-d here? There you don't check next_table_maddr (and I see no reason you would need to). Oh, I see, there's a similar check in a different place there. But this needs to be functionally similar here then. Specifically, ... > + { > + amd_dump_p2m_table_level( > + maddr_to_page(next_table_maddr), level - 1, > + address, indent + 1); > + } > + else ... you'd get into the else's body if next_table_maddr was zero, which is wrong afaict. So I think flow like if ( next_level ) print else if ( next_table_maddr ) recurse would be the preferable way to go if you feel that these zero checks are necessary (and if you do then, because this being the case is really a bug, this shouldn't go through silently). [Santosh Jodh] I was basing my code on existing code in the individual files. I was just being paranoid as this is debug code and I would not want to crash the system. Anyway, I am resending a patch that structures the code in the same way for both Intel and AMD. > + { > + int i; > + > + for ( i = 0; i < indent; i++ ) > + printk(" "); printk("%*s...", indent, "", ...); [Santosh Jodh] Cool - got it. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |