From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55819) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b7x8o-0003ps-Vj for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 31 May 2016 23:48:24 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b7x8l-0000IJ-Pv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 31 May 2016 23:48:22 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:53405) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1b7x8l-0000Hp-KA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 31 May 2016 23:48:19 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 09:18:15 +0530 From: Amit Shah Message-ID: <20160601034815.GG4456@grmbl.mre> References: <1463489755-30703-1-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com> <1463489755-30703-3-git-send-email-dgilbert@redhat.com> <20160523070208.GA24417@grmbl.mre> <20160531161047.GA2264@work-vm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160531161047.GA2264@work-vm> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 2/6] Migration: Split out ram part of qmp_query_migrate List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, quintela@redhat.com, aarcange@redhat.com, den@openvz.org, marcel.a@redhat.com On (Tue) 31 May 2016 [17:10:48], Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > * Amit Shah (amit.shah@redhat.com) wrote: > > On (Tue) 17 May 2016 [13:55:51], Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) wrote: > > > From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" > > > > > > The RAM section of qmp_query_migrate is reasonably complex > > > and repeated 3 times. Split it out into a helper. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Dr. David Alan Gilbert > > > Reviewed-by: Eric Blake > > > Reviwed-by: Denis V. Lunev > > > --- > > > migration/migration.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------- > > > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/migration/migration.c b/migration/migration.c > > > index 991313a..bfb326d 100644 > > > --- a/migration/migration.c > > > +++ b/migration/migration.c > > > @@ -561,6 +561,25 @@ static void get_xbzrle_cache_stats(MigrationInfo *info) > > > } > > > } > > > > > > +static void populate_ram_info(MigrationInfo *info, MigrationState *s) > > > +{ > > > + info->has_ram = true; > > > + info->ram = g_malloc0(sizeof(*info->ram)); > > > + info->ram->transferred = ram_bytes_transferred(); > > > + info->ram->total = ram_bytes_total(); > > > + info->ram->duplicate = dup_mig_pages_transferred(); > > > + info->ram->skipped = skipped_mig_pages_transferred(); > > > + info->ram->normal = norm_mig_pages_transferred(); > > > + info->ram->normal_bytes = norm_mig_bytes_transferred(); > > > + info->ram->mbps = s->mbps; > > > + info->ram->dirty_sync_count = s->dirty_sync_count; > > > + > > > + if (s->state != MIGRATION_STATUS_COMPLETED) { > > > + info->ram->remaining = ram_bytes_remaining(); > > > + info->ram->dirty_pages_rate = s->dirty_pages_rate; > > > > In the 'else' case, shouldn't these be set to 0? > > There's no need to, see that the info->ram is allocated a few > lines above using a g_malloc0 and so it's already all zero. Ah, yeah :( One of the side-effects of using gmalloc0 is valgrind (or compiler warnings) won't be helpful when using stuff without writing to them first. That's why I prefer explicitly setting fields. Anyway, I'll pick this series up, thanks! Amit