[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [PATCH v3 4/5] common/domain: add a domain context record for shared_info...
> -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> > Sent: 19 May 2020 15:08 > To: Paul Durrant <paul@xxxxxxx> > Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Paul Durrant <pdurrant@xxxxxxxxxx>; Ian > Jackson > <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>; Andrew Cooper > <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>; George > Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>; Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>; Stefano > Stabellini > <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] common/domain: add a domain context record for > shared_info... > > On 14.05.2020 12:44, Paul Durrant wrote: > > @@ -61,6 +62,76 @@ static void dump_header(void) > > > > } > > > > +static void print_binary(const char *prefix, void *val, size_t size, > > const also for val? Yes, it can be. > > > + const char *suffix) > > +{ > > + printf("%s", prefix); > > + > > + while (size--) > > Judging from style elsewhere you look to be missing two blanks > here. > Yes. > > + { > > + uint8_t octet = *(uint8_t *)val++; > > Following the above then also better don't cast const away here. > > > + unsigned int i; > > + > > + for ( i = 0; i < 8; i++ ) > > + { > > + printf("%u", octet & 1); > > + octet >>= 1; > > + } > > + } > > + > > + printf("%s", suffix); > > +} > > + > > +static void dump_shared_info(void) > > +{ > > + DOMAIN_SAVE_TYPE(SHARED_INFO) *s; > > + shared_info_any_t *info; > > + unsigned int i; > > + > > + GET_PTR(s); > > + > > + printf(" SHARED_INFO: has_32bit_shinfo: %s buffer_size: %u\n", > > + s->has_32bit_shinfo ? "true" : "false", s->buffer_size); > > + > > + info = (shared_info_any_t *)s->buffer; > > + > > +#define GET_FIELD_PTR(_f) \ > > + (s->has_32bit_shinfo ? (void *)&(info->x32._f) : (void > > *)&(info->x64._f)) > > Better cast to const void * ? > Ok. > > +#define GET_FIELD_SIZE(_f) \ > > + (s->has_32bit_shinfo ? sizeof(info->x32._f) : sizeof(info->x64._f)) > > +#define GET_FIELD(_f) \ > > + (s->has_32bit_shinfo ? info->x32._f : info->x64._f) > > + > > + /* Array lengths are the same for 32-bit and 64-bit shared info */ > > Not really, no: > > xen_ulong_t evtchn_pending[sizeof(xen_ulong_t) * 8]; > xen_ulong_t evtchn_mask[sizeof(xen_ulong_t) * 8]; > Oh, I must have misread. > > @@ -167,12 +238,14 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) > > if ( (typecode < 0 || typecode == desc->typecode) && > > (instance < 0 || instance == desc->instance) ) > > { > > + > > printf("[%u] type: %u instance: %u length: %u\n", entry++, > > desc->typecode, desc->instance, desc->length); > > Stray insertion of a blank line? > Yes. > > @@ -1649,6 +1650,65 @@ int continue_hypercall_on_cpu( > > return 0; > > } > > > > +static int save_shared_info(const struct domain *d, struct domain_context > > *c, > > + bool dry_run) > > +{ > > + struct domain_shared_info_context ctxt = { .buffer_size = PAGE_SIZE }; > > Why not sizeof(shared_info), utilizing the zero padding on the > receiving side? > Ok, yes, I guess that would work. > > + size_t hdr_size = offsetof(typeof(ctxt), buffer); > > + int rc; > > + > > + rc = DOMAIN_SAVE_BEGIN(SHARED_INFO, c, 0); > > + if ( rc ) > > + return rc; > > + > > +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT > > + if ( !dry_run ) > > + ctxt.has_32bit_shinfo = has_32bit_shinfo(d); > > +#endif > > Nothing will go wrong without the if(), I suppose? Better drop it > then? It could then also easily be part of the initializer of ctxt. > Ok. I said last time I wanted to keep it as it was illustrative but I'll drop it since it has now come up twice. > > + rc = domain_save_data(c, &ctxt, hdr_size); > > + if ( rc ) > > + return rc; > > + > > + rc = domain_save_data(c, d->shared_info, ctxt.buffer_size); > > + if ( rc ) > > + return rc; > > + > > + return domain_save_end(c); > > +} > > + > > +static int load_shared_info(struct domain *d, struct domain_context *c) > > +{ > > + struct domain_shared_info_context ctxt; > > + size_t hdr_size = offsetof(typeof(ctxt), buffer); > > + unsigned int i; > > + int rc; > > + > > + rc = DOMAIN_LOAD_BEGIN(SHARED_INFO, c, &i); > > + if ( rc || i ) /* expect only a single instance */ > > + return rc; > > + > > + rc = domain_load_data(c, &ctxt, hdr_size); > > + if ( rc ) > > + return rc; > > + > > + if ( ctxt.pad[0] || ctxt.pad[1] || ctxt.pad[2] || > > + ctxt.buffer_size != PAGE_SIZE ) > > + return -EINVAL; > > + > > +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT > > + d->arch.has_32bit_shinfo = ctxt.has_32bit_shinfo; > > +#endif > > There's nothing wrong with using has_32bit_shinfo(d) here as well. > I just thought it looked odd. > > --- a/xen/include/public/save.h > > +++ b/xen/include/public/save.h > > @@ -73,7 +73,16 @@ struct domain_save_header { > > }; > > DECLARE_DOMAIN_SAVE_TYPE(HEADER, 1, struct domain_save_header); > > > > -#define DOMAIN_SAVE_CODE_MAX 1 > > +struct domain_shared_info_context { > > + uint8_t has_32bit_shinfo; > > + uint8_t pad[3]; > > 32-(or 16-)bit flags, with just a single bit used for the purpose? > I debated that. Given this is xen/tools-only would a bit-field be acceptable? Paul > Jan
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |