From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41978) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aTYZx-0004co-Tg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 12:29:26 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aTYZt-0001jK-2j for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 12:29:25 -0500 Received: from mailapp01.imgtec.com ([195.59.15.196]:51989) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aTYZs-0001jA-SC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 12:29:20 -0500 References: <1455113505-11237-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> From: Leon Alrae Message-ID: <56BB736C.9010001@imgtec.com> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 17:29:16 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1455113505-11237-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] memory: fix usage of find_next_bit and find_next_zero_bit List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, stefanha@redhat.com On 10/02/16 14:11, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > The last two arguments to these functions are the last and first bit to > check relative to the base. The code was using incorrectly the first > bit and the number of bits. Fix this in cpu_physical_memory_get_dirty > and cpu_physical_memory_all_dirty. This requires a few changes in the > iteration; change the code in cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_range to > match. > > Fixes: 5b82b70 > Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi > Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini > --- > include/exec/ram_addr.h | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) It fixes the performance problem I was seeing: Tested-by: Leon Alrae Thanks, Leon