On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 11:38:04 +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
> This will allow us to perform PVR matching more broadly, eg. consider
> both POWER8 and POWER8E CPUs to be the same even though they have
> different PVR values.
> ---
> src/cpu/cpu_ppc64.c | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> src/cpu/cpu_ppc64_data.h | 8 +++++-
> 2 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/cpu/cpu_ppc64.c b/src/cpu/cpu_ppc64.c
> index d186d4c..9351729 100644
> --- a/src/cpu/cpu_ppc64.c
> +++ b/src/cpu/cpu_ppc64.c
> @@ -63,6 +63,7 @@ ppc64DataFree(virCPUppc64Data *data)
> if (!data)
> return;
>
> + VIR_FREE(data->pvr);
> VIR_FREE(data);
> }
OK, ignore my comment on the previous patch :-)
> @@ -70,16 +71,27 @@ static virCPUppc64Data *
> ppc64DataCopy(virCPUppc64Data *data)
> {
> virCPUppc64Data *copy;
> + size_t i;
>
> if (!data)
> return NULL;
>
> if (VIR_ALLOC(copy) < 0)
> - return NULL;
> + goto error;
> +
> + if (VIR_ALLOC_N(copy->pvr, data->len) < 0)
> + goto error;
> +
> + copy->len = data->len;
>
> - copy->pvr = data->pvr;
> + for (i = 0; i < data->len; i++)
> + copy->pvr[i].value = data->pvr[i].value;
>
> return copy;
> +
> + error:
> + ppc64DataFree(copy);
> + return NULL;
> }
>
> static void
> @@ -168,11 +180,13 @@ ppc64ModelFindPVR(const struct ppc64_map *map,
> uint32_t pvr)
> {
> struct ppc64_model *model;
> + size_t i;
>
> model = map->models;
> while (model) {
> - if (model->data->pvr == pvr)
> - return model;
> + for (i = 0; i < model->data->len; i++)
> + if (model->data->pvr[i].value == pvr)
> + return model;
I think the for loop would deserve {} around its body.
>
> model = model->next;
> }
> @@ -274,8 +288,12 @@ ppc64ModelLoad(xmlXPathContextPtr ctxt,
> struct ppc64_map *map)
> {
> struct ppc64_model *model;
> + xmlNodePtr *nodes = NULL;
> char *vendor = NULL;
> + char *prop = NULL;
> unsigned long pvr;
> + size_t i;
> + int n;
>
> if (VIR_ALLOC(model) < 0)
> return -1;
> @@ -315,14 +333,38 @@ ppc64ModelLoad(xmlXPathContextPtr ctxt,
> }
> }
>
> - if (!virXPathBoolean("boolean(./pvr)", ctxt) ||
> - virXPathULongHex("string(./pvr/@value)", ctxt, &pvr) < 0) {
> + if ((n = virXPathNodeSet("./pvr", ctxt, &nodes)) <= 0) {
> virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR,
> - _("Missing or invalid PVR value in CPU model %s"),
> + _("Missing PVR information for CPU model %s"),
> model->name);
> goto ignore;
> }
> - model->data->pvr = pvr;
> +
> + if (VIR_ALLOC_N(model->data->pvr, n) < 0)
> + goto ignore;
> +
> + model->data->len = n;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
> +
Drop the empty line here.
> + if (!(prop = virXMLPropString(nodes[i], "value"))) {
> + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR,
> + _("Missing PVR value in CPU model %s"),
> + model->name);
> + goto ignore;
> + }
> +
> + if (virStrToLong_ul(prop, NULL, 16, &pvr) < 0) {
> + virReportError(VIR_ERR_INTERNAL_ERROR,
> + _("Invalid PVR value in CPU model %s"),
> + model->name);
> + goto ignore;
> + }
Any particular reason to replace virXPathULongHex with the above code?
> +
> + model->data->pvr[i].value = pvr;
> +
> + VIR_FREE(prop);
> + }
>
> if (!map->models) {
> map->models = model;
...
Looks OK otherwise.
Jirka
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list