Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/5] xen:x86: record RMRR mappings

["Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>]

On 2014/8/8 23:36, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 07.08.14 at 13:02, <tiejun.chen@intel.com> wrote:
>> +/* Record RMRR mapping to ready expose VM. */
>> +static int __init rmrr_e820_register(struct acpi_rmrr_unit *rmrr)
>> +{
>> +    static int i = 0;
>> +
>> +    rmrr_e820.map[i].addr = rmrr->base_address;
>> +    rmrr_e820.map[i].size = rmrr->end_address - rmrr->base_address;
>> +    rmrr_e820.map[i].type = E820_RESERVED;
>> +    rmrr_e820.nr_map = i;
>> +    i++;
>> +    return 0;
>> +}
>
> As already said elsewhere, the piggybacking on the E820 structure
> isn't suitable here due to that ones limited size.

Are you saying the limited number of e820entry? If yes, I don't think 
this would be limited here.

Because struct e820map always define this as follows,

#define E820MAX 128

struct e820map {
     unsigned int nr_map;
     struct e820entry map[E820MAX];
};

>
> Also, just as general remarks,
> - "i" should be unsigned and placed in __initdata
> - "i" anyway is redundant with rmrr_e820.nr_map
> - there should be a blank line between the last "ordinary"
>    and the return statements
>

I will try to refine these stuffs next revision.

Thanks
Tiejun

> Jan
>
>