[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()
Hi Jan, On 05/06/2019 11:43, Jan Beulich wrote: 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 ... This is a mistake when I wrote the patch/rebase. --- 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). I will only re-flow this message. Cheers, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |