[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 04/12] swiotlb-xen: ensure to issue well-formed XENMEM_exchange requests
- To: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 09:17:52 +0200
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=JkupI+z+J+GPRZUv9g1ZG2/sSk1W40uKlMym8BknD0E=; b=lE3/l2qHJ5578JodgGjuzZbrAnE3nNapJG3/AG7YJkAzB4d9/GhPmnpwYGQ7NNi3Ww0kBlCsgzv8iCoqv2DgXYIeiv7o8DesFIZS1mP6HWd6yF3Ll2zmL3Vb1KqXelESjJv9wPP3bMCrROYSzaHXbAZ+EEK3xPRFbZR65KXHYputs+dgrXcdGVF3jRZgFXRxAYaNk4W+eLQkHOClctDDyGzgXJ88r95gwjd5eZi5CR/h7p2rYWQHg76+SjMsg1TIUD5pz0MnNj8Gwg4lDgL0Pgd91qjigzduOwCAwLL+Ipl9MeVsAL2/TspKGM63AyNM6jLJm/eQGX7BfKs0uzG7tQ==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=OeRBxzYzUzjMK4NSiP34Uk/PcCgaLlmWWALtsohSs97gu8xJZfoIimujkQ83aG7Bl9U9uvLV0Py1kG1SmhkhENRuac72SfZCM43d4cZ5QCEctT8ZroBh6B7P6FXSuRC6HAp6eo5DruganR/FzlCGPXOTClkYUpV+9ubBHT71Pj2+jPs/5BxqQ13fDSgO7pXIKtoiYaUHvd0v2O00SP2/1grexcnmraLckL+OKjTG6isbkBCFuKNpBJffDpBCqhen1oFmXGMttkgQlEWz7Qn3g5nnO3g6/zKyDc0T8MK0EzLepoB+0XHePje0uIbd3/Vgl5aFqtxNJt2DFlDq1tiP+g==
- Authentication-results: lists.xenproject.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;lists.xenproject.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>, lkml <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 07:18:13 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 11.09.2021 01:14, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2021, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> While the hypervisor hasn't been enforcing this, we would still better
>> avoid issuing requests with GFNs not aligned to the requested order.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> I wonder how useful it is to include the alignment in the panic()
>> message.
>
> Not very useful given that it is static. I don't mind either way but you
> can go ahead and remove it if you prefer (and it would make the line
> shorter.)
>
>
>> I further wonder how useful it is to wrap "bytes" in
>> PAGE_ALIGN(), when it is a multiple of a segment's size anyway (or at
>> least was supposed to be, prior to "swiotlb-xen: maintain slab count
>> properly").
>
> This one I would keep, to make sure to print out the same amount passed
> to memblock_alloc.
Oh - if I was to drop it from the printk(), I would have been meaning to
also drop it there. If it's useless, then it's useless everywhere.
Jan
|
