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

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>]

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?

  -George