From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60047) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bG8UC-0008Ct-So for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:32:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bG8U9-0000ZG-4q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:32:15 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:56020) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bG8U8-0000ZB-Rh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 13:32:13 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 14:32:10 -0300 From: Eduardo Habkost Message-ID: <20160623173210.GC3332@thinpad.lan.raisama.net> References: <1466693669-139967-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <1466693669-139967-4-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1466693669-139967-4-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 03/11] pc: extract CPU lookup into a separate function List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Igor Mammedov Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, pbonzini@redhat.com, rth@twiddle.net, mst@redhat.com, armbru@redhat.com, eduardo.otubo@profitbricks.com, zhugh.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com, eblake@redhat.com On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 04:54:21PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > it will be reused in the next patch at pre_plug time > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov > --- > hw/i386/pc.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c > index 07a3b82..ec9b14b 100644 > --- a/hw/i386/pc.c > +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c > @@ -1675,11 +1675,25 @@ static int pc_apic_cmp(const void *a, const void *b) > return apic_a->arch_id - apic_b->arch_id; > } > > +static CPUArchId *pc_find_cpu(PCMachineState *pcms, CPUState *cpu, int *idx) A short comment explaining what it does (and what does the return value actually means) would't be bad. The function name confused me when reviewing patch 07/11, as: 1) returning non-NULL means a CPU "slot"[1] exists, not necessarily that a CPU exists; 2) returning NULL means that a CPU doesn't exist _and_ that the ID/slot is not available for plugging. I would call it pc_find_cpu_slot() or pc_find_possible_cpu_id(). [1] Or whatever name we choose to call a "possible ID/address for a CPU". > +{ > + CPUClass *cc = CPU_GET_CLASS(cpu); > + CPUArchId apic_id, *found_cpu; > + > + apic_id.arch_id = cc->get_arch_id(CPU(cpu)); > + found_cpu = bsearch(&apic_id, pcms->possible_cpus->cpus, > + pcms->possible_cpus->len, sizeof(*pcms->possible_cpus->cpus), > + pc_apic_cmp); > + if (found_cpu && idx) { > + *idx = found_cpu - pcms->possible_cpus->cpus; > + } > + return found_cpu; > +} > + > static void pc_cpu_plug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, > DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) > { > - CPUClass *cc = CPU_GET_CLASS(dev); > - CPUArchId apic_id, *found_cpu; > + CPUArchId *found_cpu; > HotplugHandlerClass *hhc; > Error *local_err = NULL; > PCMachineState *pcms = PC_MACHINE(hotplug_dev); > @@ -1703,11 +1717,7 @@ static void pc_cpu_plug(HotplugHandler *hotplug_dev, > /* increment the number of CPUs */ > rtc_set_memory(pcms->rtc, 0x5f, rtc_get_memory(pcms->rtc, 0x5f) + 1); > > - apic_id.arch_id = cc->get_arch_id(CPU(dev)); > - found_cpu = bsearch(&apic_id, pcms->possible_cpus->cpus, > - pcms->possible_cpus->len, sizeof(*pcms->possible_cpus->cpus), > - pc_apic_cmp); > - assert(found_cpu); > + found_cpu = pc_find_cpu(pcms, CPU(dev), NULL); > found_cpu->cpu = CPU(dev); > out: > error_propagate(errp, local_err); > -- > 1.8.3.1 > -- Eduardo