Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] libxc/xentrace: Replace xc_tbuf_set_cpu_mask with CPU mask with xc_cpumap_t instead of uint32_t

[Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>]

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 02:30:28PM +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 06/13/2014 09:41 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> >We replace the implementation of xc_tbuf_set_cpu_mask with
> >an xc_cpumap_t instead of a uint32_t. This means we can use an
> >arbitrary bitmap without being limited to the 32-bits as
> >previously we were. Furthermore since there is only one
> >user of xc_tbuf_set_cpu_mask we just replace it and
> >its user in one go.
> >
> >We also add an macro which can be used by both libxc and
> >xentrace.
> >
> >And update the man page to describe this behavior.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
> 
> xentrace side looks good to me, with one minor thing...
> 
> >@@ -513,23 +513,66 @@ static struct t_struct *map_tbufs(unsigned long tbufs_mfn, unsigned int num,
> >      return &tbufs;
> >  }
> >+void print_cpu_mask(xc_cpumap_t mask, int bits)
> >+{
> >+    unsigned int v, had_printed = 0;
> >+    int i;
> >+
> >+    fprintf(stderr, "change cpumask to 0x");
> >+
> >+    for ( i = DIV_ROUND_UP(bits, 8); i >= 0; i-- )
> >+    {
> >+        v = mask[i];
> >+        if ( v || had_printed ) {
> >+            fprintf(stderr,"%x", v);
> >+            had_printed = 1;
> >+        }
> >+   }
> >+   fprintf(stderr, "\n");
> 
> If I'm reading this right, if the user enters "-c 0x0", the output of this
> will be as follows:
> 
>  change cpumask to 0x
> 
> Maybe we should add "i==0" (or "!i") to the conditions under which it will
> print the mask?

Will do in the next posting!
> 
>  -George
>