On 02.03.21 18:32, Peter Xu wrote:
On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 02:49:37PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
@@ -899,13 +899,17 @@ int kvm_s390_mem_op_pv(S390CPU *cpu, uint64_t offset, void *hostbuf,
* to grow. We also have to use MAP parameters that avoid
* read-only mapping of guest pages.
*/
-static void *legacy_s390_alloc(size_t size, uint64_t *align, bool shared)
+static void *legacy_s390_alloc(size_t size, uint64_t *align, bool shared,
+ bool noreserve)
{
static void *mem;
if (mem) {
/* we only support one allocation, which is enough for initial ram */
return NULL;
+ } else if (noreserve) {
+ error_report("Skipping reservation of swap space is not supported.");
+ return NULL
Semicolon missing.
Thanks for catching that!
}
mem = mmap((void *) 0x800000000ULL, size,
diff --git a/util/mmap-alloc.c b/util/mmap-alloc.c
index b50dc86a3c..bb99843106 100644
--- a/util/mmap-alloc.c
+++ b/util/mmap-alloc.c
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
#include "qemu/osdep.h"
#include "qemu/mmap-alloc.h"
#include "qemu/host-utils.h"
+#include "qemu/error-report.h"
#define HUGETLBFS_MAGIC 0x958458f6
@@ -174,12 +175,18 @@ void *qemu_ram_mmap(int fd,
size_t align,
bool readonly,
bool shared,
- bool is_pmem)
+ bool is_pmem,
+ bool noreserve)
Maybe at some point we should use flags too here to cover all bools.
Right. I guess the main point was to not reuse RAM_XXX.
Should I introduce RAM_MMAP_XXX ?
Thanks!
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
