On 5/21/2020 10:00 PM, Zenghui Yu wrote:
On 2020/5/17 18:08, Jingyi Wang wrote:
If ipi_exec() fails because of timeout, we shouldn't increase
the number of ipi received.
Signed-off-by: Jingyi Wang <wangjingyi11@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
arm/micro-bench.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arm/micro-bench.c b/arm/micro-bench.c
index 4612f41..ca022d9 100644
--- a/arm/micro-bench.c
+++ b/arm/micro-bench.c
@@ -103,7 +103,9 @@ static void ipi_exec(void)
while (!ipi_received && tries--)
cpu_relax();
- ++received;
+ if (ipi_recieved)
I think you may want *ipi_received* ;-) Otherwise it can not even
compile!
+ ++received;
+
assert_msg(ipi_received, "failed to receive IPI in time, but
received %d successfully\n", received);
}
With this fixed, this looks good to me,
Reviewed-by: Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks.
.
This variable name is modified in the next patch, so I ignored that
mistake, thanks.
Thanks,
Jingyi
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
