From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46074) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fb0VD-0002fH-BK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Jul 2018 05:24:40 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fb0VA-0002br-6W for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 05 Jul 2018 05:24:39 -0400 Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2018 11:24:30 +0200 From: Cornelia Huck Message-ID: <20180705112430.4e74049f.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <1530536651-1588-1-git-send-email-imbrenda@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1530536651-1588-1-git-send-email-imbrenda@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/1] s390x/storage attributes: fix CMMA_BLOCK_SIZE usage List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Claudio Imbrenda Cc: borntraeger@de.ibm.com, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Mon, 2 Jul 2018 15:04:11 +0200 Claudio Imbrenda wrote: > The macro CMMA_BLOCK_SIZE was defined but not used, and a hardcoded > value was instead used in the code. > > This patch fixes the value of CMMA_BLOCK_SIZE and uses it in the > appropriate place in the code, and fixes another case of hardcoded > value in the KVM backend, replacing it with the more appropriate > constant KVM_S390_CMMA_SIZE_MAX. > > Signed-off-by: Claudio Imbrenda > --- > hw/s390x/s390-stattrib-kvm.c | 3 ++- > hw/s390x/s390-stattrib.c | 5 +++-- > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-stattrib.c b/hw/s390x/s390-stattrib.c > index 70b9555..a788cdb 100644 > --- a/hw/s390x/s390-stattrib.c > +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-stattrib.c > @@ -20,7 +20,8 @@ > #include "qapi/error.h" > #include "qapi/qmp/qdict.h" > > -#define CMMA_BLOCK_SIZE (1 << 10) > +/* 512kB cover 2GB of guest memory */ > +#define CMMA_BLOCK_SIZE (1 << 19) Hm, this doesn't apply to current master anymore. Do we want to switch to something based on the IEC binary prefix definitions here, or keep the 1 << 19? > > #define STATTR_FLAG_EOS 0x01ULL > #define STATTR_FLAG_MORE 0x02ULL > @@ -202,7 +203,7 @@ static int cmma_save(QEMUFile *f, void *opaque, int final) > S390StAttribClass *sac = S390_STATTRIB_GET_CLASS(sas); > uint8_t *buf; > int r, cx, reallen = 0, ret = 0; > - uint32_t buflen = 1 << 19; /* 512kB cover 2GB of guest memory */ > + uint32_t buflen = CMMA_BLOCK_SIZE; > uint64_t start_gfn = sas->migration_cur_gfn; > > buf = g_try_malloc(buflen);