On 29.09.21 16:22, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 9/29/21 5:03 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 29.09.21 10:45, David Hildenbrand wrote:
Can we go one step further and do
@@ -20,24 +20,11 @@ static int xen_oldmem_pfn_is_ram(unsigned long pfn)
struct xen_hvm_get_mem_type a = {
.domid = DOMID_SELF,
.pfn = pfn,
+ .mem_type = HVMMEM_ram_rw,
};
- int ram;
- if (HYPERVISOR_hvm_op(HVMOP_get_mem_type, &a))
- return -ENXIO;
-
- switch (a.mem_type) {
- case HVMMEM_mmio_dm:
- ram = 0;
- break;
- case HVMMEM_ram_rw:
- case HVMMEM_ram_ro:
- default:
- ram = 1;
- break;
- }
-
- return ram;
+ HYPERVISOR_hvm_op(HVMOP_get_mem_type, &a);
+ return a.mem_type != HVMMEM_mmio_dm;
I was actually thinking of asking you to add another patch with pr_warn_once() here (and print error code as well). This call failing is indication of something going quite wrong and it would be good to know about this.
Will include a patch in v2, thanks!
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
