[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 11/14] xen/x86: p2m: Remove duplicate error message in p2m_pt_audit_p2m()
>>> On 03.06.19 at 18:03, <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote: > p2m_pt_audit_p2m() has one place where the same message may be printed > twice via printk and P2M_PRINTK. > > Remove the one printed using printk to stay consistent with the rest of > the code. > > Take the opportunity to reflow the format of P2M_PRINTK. Hmm, yes, but ... > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pt.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-pt.c > @@ -1041,9 +1041,8 @@ long p2m_pt_audit_p2m(struct p2m_domain *p2m) > if ( m2pfn != (gfn + i2) ) > { > pmbad++; > - P2M_PRINTK("mismatch: gfn %#lx -> mfn %#lx" > - " -> gfn %#lx\n", gfn+i2, mfn+i2, > - m2pfn); > + P2M_PRINTK("mismatch: gfn %#lx -> mfn %#lx -> > gfn %#lx\n", > + gfn + i2, mfn + i2, m2pfn); ... you re-flow an unrelated (but similar) one while ... > @@ -1108,8 +1107,6 @@ long p2m_pt_audit_p2m(struct p2m_domain *p2m) > !p2m_is_shared(type) ) > { > pmbad++; > - printk("mismatch: gfn %#lx -> mfn %#lx" > - " -> gfn %#lx\n", gfn, mfn, m2pfn); > P2M_PRINTK("mismatch: gfn %#lx -> mfn %#lx" > " -> gfn %#lx\n", gfn, mfn, m2pfn); ... you leave alone this one. I don't mind touching the other one, but this one surely wants touching then as well. And if you touch that other one, then I think for consistency you should also touch the 3rd one (between the two). Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |