All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] domain builder: Fix sp_extents allocation
@ 2008-07-31 11:12 Samuel Thibault
  2008-07-31 11:19 ` Keir Fraser
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Samuel Thibault @ 2008-07-31 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: xen-devel

domain builder: Fix sp_extents allocation

We do not need more than count elements in the sp_extents array.

diff -r e355f9dce939 tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build.c
--- a/tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build.c	Wed Jul 30 17:20:25 2008 +0100
+++ b/tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build.c	Thu Jul 31 11:43:36 2008 +0100
@@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ static int setup_guest(int xc_handle,
         if ( ((count | cur_pages) & (SUPERPAGE_NR_PFNS - 1)) == 0 )
         {
             long done;
-            xen_pfn_t sp_extents[2048 >> SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT];
+            xen_pfn_t sp_extents[count >> SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT];
             struct xen_memory_reservation sp_req = {
                 .nr_extents   = count >> SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT,
                 .extent_order = SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT,

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] domain builder: Fix sp_extents allocation
  2008-07-31 11:12 [PATCH] domain builder: Fix sp_extents allocation Samuel Thibault
@ 2008-07-31 11:19 ` Keir Fraser
  2008-07-31 11:29   ` Samuel Thibault
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Keir Fraser @ 2008-07-31 11:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Samuel Thibault, xen-devel

Doesn't this turn the array allocation into a dynamic allocation? I feel a
bit dubious about that.

 -- Keir

On 31/7/08 12:12, "Samuel Thibault" <samuel.thibault@eu.citrix.com> wrote:

> domain builder: Fix sp_extents allocation
> 
> We do not need more than count elements in the sp_extents array.
> 
> diff -r e355f9dce939 tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build.c
> --- a/tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build.c Wed Jul 30 17:20:25 2008 +0100
> +++ b/tools/libxc/xc_hvm_build.c Thu Jul 31 11:43:36 2008 +0100
> @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ static int setup_guest(int xc_handle,
>          if ( ((count | cur_pages) & (SUPERPAGE_NR_PFNS - 1)) == 0 )
>          {
>              long done;
> -            xen_pfn_t sp_extents[2048 >> SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT];
> +            xen_pfn_t sp_extents[count >> SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT];
>              struct xen_memory_reservation sp_req = {
>                  .nr_extents   = count >> SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT,
>                  .extent_order = SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT,
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] domain builder: Fix sp_extents allocation
  2008-07-31 11:19 ` Keir Fraser
@ 2008-07-31 11:29   ` Samuel Thibault
  2008-07-31 11:39     ` Keir Fraser
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Samuel Thibault @ 2008-07-31 11:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Keir Fraser; +Cc: xen-devel

Keir Fraser, le Thu 31 Jul 2008 12:19:18 +0100, a écrit :
> Doesn't this turn the array allocation into a dynamic allocation? I feel a
> bit dubious about that.

> >          {
> >              long done;
> > -            xen_pfn_t sp_extents[2048 >> SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT];
> > +            xen_pfn_t sp_extents[count >> SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT];
> >              struct xen_memory_reservation sp_req = {

Err, I'd think that it just turns a

sub (2048>>SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT) * sizeof(xen_pfn_t), %esp

into a

mov count, %eax
shr SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT - log2(sizeof(xen_pfn_t)), %eax
sub %eax, %esp

Samuel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] domain builder: Fix sp_extents allocation
  2008-07-31 11:29   ` Samuel Thibault
@ 2008-07-31 11:39     ` Keir Fraser
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Keir Fraser @ 2008-07-31 11:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Samuel Thibault; +Cc: xen-devel

On 31/7/08 12:29, "Samuel Thibault" <samuel.thibault@eu.citrix.com> wrote:

> Keir Fraser, le Thu 31 Jul 2008 12:19:18 +0100, a écrit :
>> Doesn't this turn the array allocation into a dynamic allocation? I feel a
>> bit dubious about that.
> 
>>>          {
>>>              long done;
>>> -            xen_pfn_t sp_extents[2048 >> SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT];
>>> +            xen_pfn_t sp_extents[count >> SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT];
>>>              struct xen_memory_reservation sp_req = {
> 
> Err, I'd think that it just turns a
> 
> sub (2048>>SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT) * sizeof(xen_pfn_t), %esp
> 
> into a
> 
> mov count, %eax
> shr SUPERPAGE_PFN_SHIFT - log2(sizeof(xen_pfn_t)), %eax
> sub %eax, %esp

Yes, good point!

 -- Keir

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2008-07-31 11:39 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-07-31 11:12 [PATCH] domain builder: Fix sp_extents allocation Samuel Thibault
2008-07-31 11:19 ` Keir Fraser
2008-07-31 11:29   ` Samuel Thibault
2008-07-31 11:39     ` Keir Fraser

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.