[PATCH]arch:x86:kvm:i8254.h Fix typo in kvm_pit

[PATCH]arch:x86:kvm:i8254.h Fix typo in kvm_pit

[Justin P. Mattock]

The below patch changes base_addresss to base_address.
Note: I have grepped for base_addresss and nothing shows up,
grepping for base_address gets me lots of output, telling me that
this is a typo, but could be wrong.

Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock <justinmattock@gmail.com>

---
 arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h |    2 +-
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
index 46d08ca..c2fa48b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ struct kvm_kpit_state {
 };
 
 struct kvm_pit {
-	unsigned long base_addresss;
+	unsigned long base_address;
 	struct kvm_io_device dev;
 	struct kvm_io_device speaker_dev;
 	struct kvm *kvm;
-- 
1.7.4.1

Re: [PATCH]arch:x86:kvm:i8254.h Fix typo in kvm_pit

[Avi Kivity]

On 03/30/2011 06:19 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
> The below patch changes base_addresss to base_address.
> Note: I have grepped for base_addresss and nothing shows up,
> grepping for base_address gets me lots of output, telling me that
> this is a typo, but could be wrong.
>
> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>
>
> ---
>   arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h |    2 +-
>   1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
> index 46d08ca..c2fa48b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ struct kvm_kpit_state {
>   };
>
>   struct kvm_pit {
> -	unsigned long base_addresss;
> +	unsigned long base_address;
>   	struct kvm_io_device dev;
>   	struct kvm_io_device speaker_dev;
>   	struct kvm *kvm;

Why not remove the variable completely?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Re: [PATCH]arch:x86:kvm:i8254.h Fix typo in kvm_pit

[Justin P. Mattock]

On 03/30/2011 09:26 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 06:19 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>> The below patch changes base_addresss to base_address.
>> Note: I have grepped for base_addresss and nothing shows up,
>> grepping for base_address gets me lots of output, telling me that
>> this is a typo, but could be wrong.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>
>>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h | 2 +-
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>> index 46d08ca..c2fa48b 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ struct kvm_kpit_state {
>> };
>>
>> struct kvm_pit {
>> - unsigned long base_addresss;
>> + unsigned long base_address;
>> struct kvm_io_device dev;
>> struct kvm_io_device speaker_dev;
>> struct kvm *kvm;
>
> Why not remove the variable completely?
>

didnt even think to completely remove the variable(figured it was used 
somewhere).I will look at that and resend with removal of the variable 
for you..

Justin P. Mattock

Re: [PATCH]arch:x86:kvm:i8254.h Fix typo in kvm_pit

[Avi Kivity]

On 03/30/2011 06:30 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 09:26 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 03/30/2011 06:19 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>> The below patch changes base_addresss to base_address.
>>> Note: I have grepped for base_addresss and nothing shows up,
>>> grepping for base_address gets me lots of output, telling me that
>>> this is a typo, but could be wrong.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h | 2 +-
>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>> index 46d08ca..c2fa48b 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ struct kvm_kpit_state {
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct kvm_pit {
>>> - unsigned long base_addresss;
>>> + unsigned long base_address;
>>> struct kvm_io_device dev;
>>> struct kvm_io_device speaker_dev;
>>> struct kvm *kvm;
>>
>> Why not remove the variable completely?
>>
>
> didnt even think to completely remove the variable(figured it was used 
> somewhere).I will look at that and resend with removal of the variable 
> for you..

Well if it was used, you ought to have changed all of the users, no?

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Re: [PATCH]arch:x86:kvm:i8254.h Fix typo in kvm_pit

[Justin P. Mattock]

On 03/30/2011 10:17 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 06:30 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>> On 03/30/2011 09:26 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 03/30/2011 06:19 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>> The below patch changes base_addresss to base_address.
>>>> Note: I have grepped for base_addresss and nothing shows up,
>>>> grepping for base_address gets me lots of output, telling me that
>>>> this is a typo, but could be wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h | 2 +-
>>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>> index 46d08ca..c2fa48b 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ struct kvm_kpit_state {
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> struct kvm_pit {
>>>> - unsigned long base_addresss;
>>>> + unsigned long base_address;
>>>> struct kvm_io_device dev;
>>>> struct kvm_io_device speaker_dev;
>>>> struct kvm *kvm;
>>>
>>> Why not remove the variable completely?
>>>
>>
>> didnt even think to completely remove the variable(figured it was used
>> somewhere).I will look at that and resend with removal of the variable
>> for you..
>
> Well if it was used, you ought to have changed all of the users, no?
>

at the moment I see:
(keep in mind my reading skills only go so far!)

  grep -Re base_address kvm/* -n
kvm/ioapic.c:276:       return ((addr >= ioapic->base_address &&
kvm/ioapic.c:277:                (addr < ioapic->base_address + 
IOAPIC_MEM_LENGTH)));
kvm/ioapic.c:371:       ioapic->base_address = IOAPIC_DEFAULT_BASE_ADDRESS;
kvm/ioapic.h:38:        u64 base_address;

so changing base_addresss; to base_address; gets kvm_ioapic_reset to 
function correctly as well as ioapic_in_range?
(but could be wrong)

Justin P. Mattock

Re: [PATCH]arch:x86:kvm:i8254.h Fix typo in kvm_pit

[Avi Kivity]

On 03/30/2011 07:42 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 10:17 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 03/30/2011 06:30 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>> On 03/30/2011 09:26 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>> On 03/30/2011 06:19 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>>> The below patch changes base_addresss to base_address.
>>>>> Note: I have grepped for base_addresss and nothing shows up,
>>>>> grepping for base_address gets me lots of output, telling me that
>>>>> this is a typo, but could be wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h | 2 +-
>>>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>>> index 46d08ca..c2fa48b 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>>> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ struct kvm_kpit_state {
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> struct kvm_pit {
>>>>> - unsigned long base_addresss;
>>>>> + unsigned long base_address;
>>>>> struct kvm_io_device dev;
>>>>> struct kvm_io_device speaker_dev;
>>>>> struct kvm *kvm;
>>>>
>>>> Why not remove the variable completely?
>>>>
>>>
>>> didnt even think to completely remove the variable(figured it was used
>>> somewhere).I will look at that and resend with removal of the variable
>>> for you..
>>
>> Well if it was used, you ought to have changed all of the users, no?
>>
>
> at the moment I see:
> (keep in mind my reading skills only go so far!)
>
>  grep -Re base_address kvm/* -n
> kvm/ioapic.c:276:       return ((addr >= ioapic->base_address &&
> kvm/ioapic.c:277:                (addr < ioapic->base_address + 
> IOAPIC_MEM_LENGTH)));
> kvm/ioapic.c:371:       ioapic->base_address = 
> IOAPIC_DEFAULT_BASE_ADDRESS;
> kvm/ioapic.h:38:        u64 base_address;
>
> so changing base_addresss; to base_address; gets kvm_ioapic_reset to 
> function correctly as well as ioapic_in_range?
> (but could be wrong)
>

Can you explain how kvm_ioapic_reset() would be affected by the change?

Really, you need to understand what you're doing before sending patches.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

Re: [PATCH]arch:x86:kvm:i8254.h Fix typo in kvm_pit

[Justin P. Mattock]

On 03/31/2011 02:20 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 03/30/2011 07:42 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>> On 03/30/2011 10:17 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 03/30/2011 06:30 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>> On 03/30/2011 09:26 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>>>> On 03/30/2011 06:19 PM, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>>>> The below patch changes base_addresss to base_address.
>>>>>> Note: I have grepped for base_addresss and nothing shows up,
>>>>>> grepping for base_address gets me lots of output, telling me that
>>>>>> this is a typo, but could be wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h | 2 +-
>>>>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>>>> index 46d08ca..c2fa48b 100644
>>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>>>> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ struct kvm_kpit_state {
>>>>>> };
>>>>>>
>>>>>> struct kvm_pit {
>>>>>> - unsigned long base_addresss;
>>>>>> + unsigned long base_address;
>>>>>> struct kvm_io_device dev;
>>>>>> struct kvm_io_device speaker_dev;
>>>>>> struct kvm *kvm;
>>>>>
>>>>> Why not remove the variable completely?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> didnt even think to completely remove the variable(figured it was used
>>>> somewhere).I will look at that and resend with removal of the variable
>>>> for you..
>>>
>>> Well if it was used, you ought to have changed all of the users, no?
>>>
>>
>> at the moment I see:
>> (keep in mind my reading skills only go so far!)
>>
>> grep -Re base_address kvm/* -n
>> kvm/ioapic.c:276: return ((addr >= ioapic->base_address &&
>> kvm/ioapic.c:277: (addr < ioapic->base_address + IOAPIC_MEM_LENGTH)));
>> kvm/ioapic.c:371: ioapic->base_address = IOAPIC_DEFAULT_BASE_ADDRESS;
>> kvm/ioapic.h:38: u64 base_address;
>>
>> so changing base_addresss; to base_address; gets kvm_ioapic_reset to
>> function correctly as well as ioapic_in_range?
>> (but could be wrong)
>>
>
> Can you explain how kvm_ioapic_reset() would be affected by the change?
>
> Really, you need to understand what you're doing before sending patches.
>

well looking at the code:
virt/kvm/ioapic.c @@276

static inline int ioapic_in_range(struct kvm_ioapic *ioapic, gpa_t addr)
{
	return ((addr >= ioapic->base_address &&
		 (addr < ioapic->base_address + IOAPIC_MEM_LENGTH)));
}

I see: base_address in there but looking more at the code its for 
something completely different..

Justin P. Mattock

Re: [PATCH]arch:x86:kvm:i8254.h Fix typo in kvm_pit

[Jiri Kosina]

On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Avi Kivity wrote:

> > > > The below patch changes base_addresss to base_address.
> > > > Note: I have grepped for base_addresss and nothing shows up,
> > > > grepping for base_address gets me lots of output, telling me that
> > > > this is a typo, but could be wrong.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>
> > > > 
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h | 2 +-
> > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
> > > > index 46d08ca..c2fa48b 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
> > > > @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ struct kvm_kpit_state {
> > > > };
> > > > 
> > > > struct kvm_pit {
> > > > - unsigned long base_addresss;
> > > > + unsigned long base_address;
> > > > struct kvm_io_device dev;
> > > > struct kvm_io_device speaker_dev;
> > > > struct kvm *kvm;
> > > 
> > > Why not remove the variable completely?
> > > 
> > 
> > didnt even think to completely remove the variable(figured it was used
> > somewhere).I will look at that and resend with removal of the variable for
> > you..
> 
> Well if it was used, you ought to have changed all of the users, no?

I am afraid Justin is not trying to compile-test his patches (I got this 
suspicion after last patchset trying to remove all the includes of 
version.h).

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

Re: [PATCH]arch:x86:kvm:i8254.h Fix typo in kvm_pit

[Justin P. Mattock]

On 03/30/2011 03:21 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Mar 2011, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>>>>> The below patch changes base_addresss to base_address.
>>>>> Note: I have grepped for base_addresss and nothing shows up,
>>>>> grepping for base_address gets me lots of output, telling me that
>>>>> this is a typo, but could be wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h | 2 +-
>>>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>>> index 46d08ca..c2fa48b 100644
>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.h
>>>>> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ struct kvm_kpit_state {
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> struct kvm_pit {
>>>>> - unsigned long base_addresss;
>>>>> + unsigned long base_address;
>>>>> struct kvm_io_device dev;
>>>>> struct kvm_io_device speaker_dev;
>>>>> struct kvm *kvm;
>>>>
>>>> Why not remove the variable completely?
>>>>
>>>
>>> didnt even think to completely remove the variable(figured it was used
>>> somewhere).I will look at that and resend with removal of the variable for
>>> you..
>>
>> Well if it was used, you ought to have changed all of the users, no?
>
> I am afraid Justin is not trying to compile-test his patches (I got this
> suspicion after last patchset trying to remove all the includes of
> version.h).
>


I do remember to do that, but I will be honest there are ones that I 
totally forgot, then remembered after sending out the patch(I admit it I 
am guilty of that)

Think having a checklist is the best thing to follow when doing a patch
(telling yourself "yeah Ill remember to do that", never is the best way.

Justin P. Mattock