[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v7 2/3] AMD/IOMMU: allow callers to request allocate_buffer() to skip its memset()
On 04.10.2019 15:26, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 26/09/2019 15:29, Jan Beulich wrote: >> The command ring buffer doesn't need clearing up front in any event. >> Subsequently we'll also want to avoid clearing the device tables. >> >> While playing with functions signatures replace undue use of fixed width >> types at the same time, and extend this to deallocate_buffer() as well. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> >> --- >> v7: New. >> >> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c >> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/amd/iommu_init.c >> @@ -994,12 +994,12 @@ static unsigned int __init dt_alloc_size >> IOMMU_DEV_TABLE_ENTRY_SIZE); >> } >> >> -static void __init deallocate_buffer(void *buf, uint32_t sz) >> +static void __init deallocate_buffer(void *buf, unsigned long sz) > > Probably best to use size_t here, being both shorter, and guaranteed not > to require modification in the future. I'd prefer not to without other related code also getting switched from unsigned long to size_t. >> { >> - int order = 0; >> if ( buf ) >> { >> - order = get_order_from_bytes(sz); >> + unsigned int order = get_order_from_bytes(sz); >> + >> __free_amd_iommu_tables(buf, order); >> } >> } > > How about simply > > if ( buf ) > __free_amd_iommu_tables(buf, get_order_from_bytes(sz)); > > which drops the order variable entirely? Fine with me; I did actually consider doing so, but then decided against to stay closer to what the code looked like before. > Ideally with both of these modifications, Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper > <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> Thanks. 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 |