[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] wrong accounting in direct_remap_pfn_range



Keir Fraser wrote:
On 31/8/06 1:37 am, "Steven Rostedt" <srostedt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

grr, I take it back, I am the one that's confused :P

OK, this all happens because this whole blob of code is crazy because it
is missing a "if (size == 0)" check!

It's not really missing. We could have a size==0 check *or* we can have the
v!=u check. We don't need both and I think the latter is more obviously
correct, as the test is closer to the code that it 'protects'. Also it's a
fairly idiomatic way of generating and flushing batches of work.


Well it wasn't obvious to me :P

If a size == 0 is passed in (for whatever reason!), couldn't we skip the flush_cache_all, flush_tlb_all and the allocation and freeing of a page and just return?

If you want this in mainline Linux, you'll probably have others mention that too.

-- Steve


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.