| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
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
|
|
|
| |
|
Home
xen.org, 