[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH] xen: Modify domain_crash() to take a print string
On 03.02.2022 15:11, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 03/02/2022 13:48, Julien Grall wrote: >> On 03/02/2022 13:38, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>> diff --git a/xen/include/xen/sched.h b/xen/include/xen/sched.h >>> index 37f78cc4c4c9..38b390d20371 100644 >>> --- a/xen/include/xen/sched.h >>> +++ b/xen/include/xen/sched.h >>> @@ -736,10 +736,15 @@ void vcpu_end_shutdown_deferral(struct vcpu *v); >>> * from any processor. >>> */ >>> void __domain_crash(struct domain *d); >>> -#define domain_crash(d) do >>> { \ >>> - printk("domain_crash called from %s:%d\n", __FILE__, >>> __LINE__); \ >>> - >>> __domain_crash(d); \ >>> -} while (0) >>> +#define domain_crash(d, ...) \ >>> + do { \ >>> + if ( count_args(__VA_ARGS__) == 0 ) \ >>> + printk("domain_crash called from %s:%d\n", \ >>> + __FILE__, __LINE__); \ >> >> I find a bit odd that here you are using a normal printk > > That's unmodified from before. Only reformatted. > >> but... >> >> >>> + else \ >>> + printk(XENLOG_G_ERR __VA_ARGS__); \ >> >> here it is XENLOG_G_ERR. In fact, isn't it ratelimited? If so, >> wouldn't it be better to only use XENLOG_ERR so they can always be >> seen? (A domain shouldn't be able to abuse it). > > Perhaps. I suppose it is more important information than pretty much > anything else about the guest. Indeed, but then - is this really an error in all cases? The prior printk() simply ended up defaulting to a warning, and I would think that's what the new one should be doing too. Or even leave the setting of the log level to the invocation sites of the macro. Jan
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |