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

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Fix xenoprof counter overflow check


  • To: "Keir Fraser" <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: "Niraj Tolia" <ntolia@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:24:15 -0800
  • Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 14:24:44 -0800
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:references; b=V3d2uR5ueskU1I08clsBga6OMkTT/GTuEHBirXLvPFDuXu2g3X6+5sn3OERmJoWIb4 dFRkdGUJCokkSYJd/z8X1C/i3p6W4MCaYWwftwADASjRW5Bkt2PAMJnKuipl5fwjSZ7u 9YMnemmVPPHWbcjNl5kUPBSHBLT/YVkjPeweo=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>



On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/01/2009 18:37, "Niraj Tolia" <ntolia@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> While the mainline patch won't build, the one attached definitely does. That
> said, I see your point about the overflow. Now I need to figure out why this
> broken patch actually enables xenoprof to work on my Intel Xeon. The only
> reason would be the switch from CTR_READ() (which uses rdmsr() internally) to
> rdmsrl() but let me dig into it.

The patch absolutely did not build. There were still references to local
variables ('low' and 'high') that you removed the definitions of.


Ah. My patch was generated against xen-3.3-testing.hg. I just noticed that the same function has a number of changes in xen-unstable and would cause a build failure. Sorry about that.

Niraj
 

 -- Keir





--
Niraj Tolia, Researcher, HP Labs
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Niraj_Tolia/
_______________________________________________
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®.