Re: [v7][RFC][PATCH 01/13] introduce XENMEM_reserved_device_memory_map

["Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>]

On 2014/10/29 16:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 29.10.14 at 01:40, <tiejun.chen@intel.com> wrote:
>> On 2014/10/28 18:36, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 28.10.14 at 03:35, <tiejun.chen@intel.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2014/10/27 21:35, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/24/2014 08:34 AM, Tiejun Chen wrote:
>>>>>> diff --git a/xen/common/memory.c b/xen/common/memory.c
>>>>>> index cc36e39..51a32a8 100644
>>>>>> --- a/xen/common/memory.c
>>>>>> +++ b/xen/common/memory.c
>>>>>> @@ -692,6 +692,32 @@ out:
>>>>>>         return rc;
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +struct get_reserved_device_memory {
>>>>>> +    struct xen_mem_reserved_device_memory_map map;
>>>>>> +    unsigned int used_entries;
>>>>>> +};
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +static int get_reserved_device_memory(xen_pfn_t start,
>>>>>> +                                      xen_ulong_t nr, void *ctxt)
>>>>>
>>>>> This function is only used when HAS_PASSTHROUGH is defined. You have to
>>>>> protected by an #ifdef HAS_PASSTHROUGH.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I guess you mean we need to do this,
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/xen/common/memory.c b/xen/common/memory.c
>>>> index 1449c10..2177c56 100644
>>>> --- a/xen/common/memory.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/common/memory.c
>>>> @@ -692,6 +692,7 @@ out:
>>>>         return rc;
>>>>     }
>>>>
>>>> +#ifdef HAS_PASSTHROUGH
>>>>     struct get_reserved_device_memory {
>>>>         struct xen_reserved_device_memory_map map;
>>>>         unsigned int used_entries;
>>>> @@ -717,6 +718,7 @@ static int get_reserved_device_memory(xen_pfn_t start,
>>>>
>>>>         return 0;
>>>>     }
>>>> +#endif
>>>>
>>>>     long do_memory_op(unsigned long cmd, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg)
>>>>     {
>>>>
>>>> Jan,
>>>>
>>>> With this above change, is the following working for you?
>>>
>>> I already fixed this in my version (which I view to be the canonical
>>> one).
>>>
>>
>> Are you point that attached patch? Are you sure? Here I pick some code
>> fragments from your latest patch,
>
> No, that fixup was in response to Julien's comment, which I think
> was given after I had forwarded you my version. In any event,

So could you send me the latest? I'd like to replace it in my tree.

Thanks
Tiejun

> what's going to get applied is what I have here unless you find a
> need to do substantial changes to it.
>
> Jan
>
>
>