Re: [PATCH v2 02/12] xenctx: Add -2 (--two-pages) option to switch stack size to 8KiB

[Don Slutz <dslutz@verizon.com>]

On 11/07/13 07:40, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-11-07 at 08:04 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 06.11.13 at 21:08, Don Slutz <dslutz@verizon.com> wrote:
>>> @@ -650,9 +651,11 @@ static int print_stack(vcpu_guest_context_any_t *ctx, int vcpu, int width)
>>>   
>>>       stack_limit = ((stack_pointer(ctx) + XC_PAGE_SIZE)
>>>                      & ~((guest_word_t) XC_PAGE_SIZE - 1));
>>> +    if (xenctx.two_pages)
>>> +        stack_limit += XC_PAGE_SIZE;
>>>       printf("\n");
>>>       printf("Stack:\n");
>>> -    for (i=1; i<5 && stack < stack_limit; i++) {
>>> +    for (i=1; i<10 && stack < stack_limit; i++) {
>> Touching a malformed line like this makes it almost mandatory imo
>> to fix the coding style (missing blanks around = and <).
Will do.
>>
>> Apart from that, the change isn't really related to the subject of
>> the patch afaict, and as you're making thing more flexible anyway,
>> it would seem reasonable to also have a command line option to
>> control this limit.
Part 1 is.  Part 2 ("i<5" to "i<10") is not, it is part of patch #3 (and 
should have been there) to keep the amount output the same.  A new 
option does make sense; will add it.
> Or derive it from stack_limit and/or the number of pages?
Not sure this is better then a new option. stack_limit currently reduces 
the amount of output.
> What about kernels which use 4 pages for their stack ;-)
Patch #8 would allow you to do this, 2 pages at a time. (or  could also 
add -4...)
    -Don Slutz

> Ian.
>