Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] XEN, X86: Improve semantic support for pagetable_reserve PVOPS

[Attilio Rao <attilio.rao@citrix.com>]

On 15/08/12 18:46, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Aug 2012, Attilio Rao wrote:
>    
>> On 15/08/12 18:25, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>      
>>> On Tue, 14 Aug 2012, Attilio Rao wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> - Allow xen_mapping_pagetable_reserve() to handle a start different from
>>>>     pgt_buf_start, but still bigger than it.
>>>> - Add checks to xen_mapping_pagetable_reserve() and native_pagetable_reserve()
>>>>     for verifying start and end are contained in the range
>>>>     [pgt_buf_start, pgt_buf_top].
>>>> - In xen_mapping_pagetable_reserve(), change printk into pr_debug.
>>>> - In xen_mapping_pagetable_reserve(), print out diagnostic only if there is
>>>>     an actual need to do that (or, in other words, if there are actually some
>>>>     pages going to switch from RO to RW).
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Attilio Rao<attilio.rao@citrix.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    arch/x86/mm/init.c |    4 ++++
>>>>    arch/x86/xen/mmu.c |   22 ++++++++++++++++++++--
>>>>    2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init.c b/arch/x86/mm/init.c
>>>> index e0e6990..c5849b6 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/mm/init.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init.c
>>>> @@ -92,6 +92,10 @@ static void __init find_early_table_space(struct map_range *mr, unsigned long en
>>>>
>>>>    void __init native_pagetable_reserve(u64 start, u64 end)
>>>>    {
>>>> +	if (start<   PFN_PHYS(pgt_buf_start) || end>   PFN_PHYS(pgt_buf_top))
>>>> +		panic("Invalid address range: [%llu - %llu] should be a subset of [%llu - %llu]\n"
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> code style (you can check whether your patch breaks the code style with
>>> scripts/checkpatch.pl)
>>>
>>>        
>> I actually did before to submit, it reported 0 errors/warning.
>>      
> strange, that really looks like a line over 80 chars
>
>    

Actually code style explicitely says to not break strings because they 
want to retain the ability to grep. In FreeBSD this is the same and I 
think this is why checkpatch doesn't whine. I don't think there is a bug 
here.

Can I submit the patch as it is, then?

Attilio