From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] libxl: claim: Print the values in 'xl info' unconditionally Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 11:17:31 +0100 Message-ID: <1368440251.537.37.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> References: <1368219645-5375-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> <1368219645-5375-5-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1368219645-5375-5-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Cc: George Dunlap , "dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov" , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Ian Jackson List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 22:00 +0100, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > During the review of "libxl: Change claim_mode from bool to int." > Ian Campbell suggested that the xl info should print the > claim information irregardless of the global claim_mode value. > > Suggested-by: Ian Campbell > Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk > --- > tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c | 6 +----- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c b/tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c > index c3e1183..bb7a7af 100644 > --- a/tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c > +++ b/tools/libxl/xl_cmdimpl.c > @@ -4604,11 +4604,7 @@ static void output_physinfo(void) > printf("sharing_freed_memory : %"PRIu64"\n", info.sharing_freed_pages / i); > printf("sharing_used_memory : %"PRIu64"\n", info.sharing_used_frames / i); > } > - /* > - * Only if enabled (claim_mode=1) or there are outstanding claims. > - */ > - if (claim_mode || info.outstanding_pages) > - printf("outstanding_claims : %ld\n", info.outstanding_pages / i); > + printf("outstanding_claims : %ld\n", info.outstanding_pages / i); I here is only initialised within the previous "if (vinfo)" (the tail of which is right above). This printf should probably therefore have always been inside that same block. (the horrible use of the variable i as something other than a loop iterator is probably at least partly to blame for the confusion) This patch isn't making this any worse so I'll Ack + apply but perhaps you could send a follow up to fix this? > > if (!libxl_get_freecpus(ctx, &cpumap)) { > libxl_for_each_bit(i, cpumap)