From: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>, Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>,
<qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, <qemu-trivial@nongnu.org>
Cc: <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, <eblake@redhat.com>,
<armbru@redhat.com>, <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH v3] util/mmap-alloc: check parameter before using
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 19:17:49 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5817285D.8020004@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <12cb403c-4679-3e85-c41c-22fb06a0f27e@redhat.com>
On 10/31/2016 03:32 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 31.10.2016 04:57, Cao jin wrote:
>>>
>>> Why did you change ptr to ptr1 here and above?
>>
>> Because, I think there always is: ptr + offset == ptr1
>>
>>>
>>> On linux, mmap(2) manpage says that address serves as hint, and the
>>> system create the mapping at a nearby page boundary. Generally, this
>>> address is just a hint. So I'm not really sure if this code is actually
>>> right.. :)
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but the 2nd mmap used MAP_FIXED, which the manpage says:
>>
>> /Don't interpret addr as a hint: place the mapping at exactly that/
>> /address. addr must be a multiple of the page size/
>> /If the specified address cannot be used, mmap() will fail/
>>
>>> At the very least, your commit comment is a bit misleading, as it says
>>> about readability, but it also MAY change semantics.
>>>
>>
>> I don't think so, one just need dig a little deeper:)
>>
>>> Maybe just move BOTH "ptr+=, total-=" parts down the line and keep
>>> using ptr instead of ptr1?
>>>
>>> It'd be very good, in my opinion, to document how this whole thing
>>> is supposed to work :)
>>>
>>
>> the change is just some simple arithmetic operation, I think it is
>> little difficult for me to find a decent description.
>
> I originally had similar problems as Michael understanding your changes
> to ptr / ptr1 ... so you should likely at add the information with
> MAP_FIXED etc. to the patch description at least, I think.
>
> It's maybe also cleaner if you split your patch into two parts, first
> patch to fix the parameter checking, and second patch to change the ptr1
> stuff. That way the later patch could also be easier reverted in case
> there are problems with that.
>
> Thomas
>
Oh, I didn't realize it would confuse people so easy, seems it actually
did:(
Readability is kind of personal taste thing, generally, I woundn't send
a patch only care readability which maybe controversial, so I am not
sure this one worth the trouble to split the patch, but if everyone want
it, I am pleased to do it.
I was hoping someone(maybe author) could give a ack, or point out the
error I made.
Will try to document it in next version.
--
Yours Sincerely,
Cao jin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>, Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-trivial@nongnu.org
Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, eblake@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com,
mst@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3] util/mmap-alloc: check parameter before using
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 19:17:49 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5817285D.8020004@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <12cb403c-4679-3e85-c41c-22fb06a0f27e@redhat.com>
On 10/31/2016 03:32 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 31.10.2016 04:57, Cao jin wrote:
>>>
>>> Why did you change ptr to ptr1 here and above?
>>
>> Because, I think there always is: ptr + offset == ptr1
>>
>>>
>>> On linux, mmap(2) manpage says that address serves as hint, and the
>>> system create the mapping at a nearby page boundary. Generally, this
>>> address is just a hint. So I'm not really sure if this code is actually
>>> right.. :)
>>>
>>
>> Yes, but the 2nd mmap used MAP_FIXED, which the manpage says:
>>
>> /Don't interpret addr as a hint: place the mapping at exactly that/
>> /address. addr must be a multiple of the page size/
>> /If the specified address cannot be used, mmap() will fail/
>>
>>> At the very least, your commit comment is a bit misleading, as it says
>>> about readability, but it also MAY change semantics.
>>>
>>
>> I don't think so, one just need dig a little deeper:)
>>
>>> Maybe just move BOTH "ptr+=, total-=" parts down the line and keep
>>> using ptr instead of ptr1?
>>>
>>> It'd be very good, in my opinion, to document how this whole thing
>>> is supposed to work :)
>>>
>>
>> the change is just some simple arithmetic operation, I think it is
>> little difficult for me to find a decent description.
>
> I originally had similar problems as Michael understanding your changes
> to ptr / ptr1 ... so you should likely at add the information with
> MAP_FIXED etc. to the patch description at least, I think.
>
> It's maybe also cleaner if you split your patch into two parts, first
> patch to fix the parameter checking, and second patch to change the ptr1
> stuff. That way the later patch could also be easier reverted in case
> there are problems with that.
>
> Thomas
>
Oh, I didn't realize it would confuse people so easy, seems it actually
did:(
Readability is kind of personal taste thing, generally, I woundn't send
a patch only care readability which maybe controversial, so I am not
sure this one worth the trouble to split the patch, but if everyone want
it, I am pleased to do it.
I was hoping someone(maybe author) could give a ack, or point out the
error I made.
Will try to document it in next version.
--
Yours Sincerely,
Cao jin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-31 11:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-28 8:56 [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH v3] util/mmap-alloc: check parameter before using Cao jin
2016-10-28 8:56 ` [Qemu-devel] " Cao jin
2016-10-28 14:22 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Michael Tokarev
2016-10-28 14:22 ` [Qemu-devel] " Michael Tokarev
2016-10-31 3:57 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Cao jin
2016-10-31 3:57 ` [Qemu-devel] " Cao jin
2016-10-31 7:32 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Thomas Huth
2016-10-31 7:32 ` [Qemu-devel] " Thomas Huth
2016-10-31 11:17 ` Cao jin [this message]
2016-10-31 11:17 ` Cao jin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5817285D.8020004@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=eblake@redhat.com \
--cc=mjt@tls.msk.ru \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-trivial@nongnu.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.