From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52077) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZeOUG-0003zX-3i for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 10:24:05 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZeOUC-0007to-0V for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 10:24:04 -0400 Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com ([194.213.3.17]:27624) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZeOUB-0007s0-PI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 22 Sep 2015 10:23:59 -0400 References: <1442333283-13119-1-git-send-email-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> <1442333283-13119-18-git-send-email-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> From: Claudio Fontana Message-ID: <5601647A.9060107@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:23:54 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1442333283-13119-18-git-send-email-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 17/46] ivshmem: improve debug messages List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: marcandre.lureau@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: drjones@redhat.com, cam@cs.ualberta.ca, stefanha@redhat.com On 15.09.2015 18:07, marcandre.lureau@redhat.com wrote: > From: Marc-André Lureau > > Some misc improvements to ivshmem debug. > > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau > --- > hw/misc/ivshmem.c | 10 +++++++--- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/misc/ivshmem.c b/hw/misc/ivshmem.c > index cda7dce..084bc89 100644 > --- a/hw/misc/ivshmem.c > +++ b/hw/misc/ivshmem.c > @@ -208,10 +208,13 @@ static void ivshmem_io_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > if (vector < s->peers[dest].nb_eventfds) { > IVSHMEM_DPRINTF("Notifying VM %d on vector %d\n", dest, vector); > event_notifier_set(&s->peers[dest].eventfds[vector]); > + } else { > + IVSHMEM_DPRINTF("Invalid destination vector %d on VM %d\n", > + vector, dest); > } > break; > default: > - IVSHMEM_DPRINTF("Invalid VM Doorbell VM %d\n", dest); > + IVSHMEM_DPRINTF("Unhandled write " TARGET_FMT_plx "\n", addr); > } > } > > @@ -263,9 +266,9 @@ static void ivshmem_receive(void *opaque, const uint8_t *buf, int size) > { > IVShmemState *s = opaque; > > - ivshmem_IntrStatus_write(s, *buf); > + IVSHMEM_DPRINTF("ivshmem_receive 0x%02x size: %d\n", *buf, size); > > - IVSHMEM_DPRINTF("ivshmem_receive 0x%02x\n", *buf); > + ivshmem_IntrStatus_write(s, *buf); > } > > static int ivshmem_can_receive(void * opaque) > @@ -592,6 +595,7 @@ static void ivshmem_use_msix(IVShmemState * s) > PCIDevice *d = PCI_DEVICE(s); > int i; > > + IVSHMEM_DPRINTF("use msix\n"); > if (!msix_present(d)) { > return; > } > This MSI-X use vs not use is a bit confusing to me. I see that the use of MSI is controlled mainly by IVSHMEM_MSI (Property "msi"), but then there are if (msix_present()) checks spread around. Could this printf be a bit more clear, possibly adding other DPRINTFs as necessary? Is your IVSHMEM_DPRINTF("use msix\n"); actually intended to mean ("using MSIX\n")? But then why is the check for if (!msix_present(d)) only afterwards? Ciao, Claudio