[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v7 01/15] x86/hvm: remove multiple open coded 'chunking' loops
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx] > Sent: 09 July 2015 17:24 > To: Paul Durrant > Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Keir (Xen.org) > Subject: RE: [PATCH v7 01/15] x86/hvm: remove multiple open coded > 'chunking' loops > > >>> On 09.07.15 at 18:16, <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxx] > >> Sent: 09 July 2015 16:13 > >> To: Paul Durrant > >> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Keir (Xen.org) > >> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 01/15] x86/hvm: remove multiple open coded > >> 'chunking' loops > >> > >> >>> On 09.07.15 at 15:10, <paul.durrant@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > +static int hvmemul_linear_mmio_access( > >> > + unsigned long gla, unsigned int size, uint8_t dir, uint8_t *buffer, > >> > + uint32_t pfec, struct hvm_emulate_ctxt *hvmemul_ctxt, bool_t > >> known_gpfn) > >> > +{ > >> > + struct hvm_vcpu_io *vio = ¤t->arch.hvm_vcpu.hvm_io; > >> > + unsigned long offset = gla & ~PAGE_MASK; > >> > + unsigned int chunk; > >> > + paddr_t gpa; > >> > + unsigned long one_rep = 1; > >> > + int rc; > >> > + > >> > + chunk = min_t(unsigned int, size, PAGE_SIZE - offset); > >> > + > >> > + if ( known_gpfn ) > >> > + gpa = pfn_to_paddr(vio->mmio_gpfn) | offset; > >> > + else > >> > + { > >> > + rc = hvmemul_linear_to_phys(gla, &gpa, chunk, &one_rep, pfec, > >> > + hvmemul_ctxt); > >> > + if ( rc != X86EMUL_OKAY ) > >> > + return rc; > >> > + } > >> > + > >> > + for ( ;; ) > >> > + { > >> > + rc = hvmemul_phys_mmio_access(gpa, chunk, dir, buffer); > >> > + if ( rc != X86EMUL_OKAY ) > >> > + break; > >> > + > >> > + gla += chunk; > >> > + buffer += chunk; > >> > + size -= chunk; > >> > + > >> > + if ( size == 0 ) > >> > + break; > >> > + > >> > + ASSERT((gla & ~PAGE_MASK) == 0); > >> > >> While I don't mean you to re-submit another time, I'd still like to > >> get my question answered: Does this really matter for the code > >> below? > > > > No, it doesn't, but if it's not true then an incorrect chunk size was chosen > > above. > > I suspected as much. It's then just slightly less odd than having > > x = 0; > ASSERT(x == 0); > Well, not quite since the lines aren't adjacent in this case. > I guess I'll strip the ASSERT() when applying. > Ok. That's fine Paul > Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |