From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [v10][PATCH 11/16] tools/libxl: detect and avoid
 conflicts with RDM
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 19:23:29 +0800
Message-ID: <55AE2BB1.9030604@intel.com>
References: <1437373023-14884-1-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<1437373023-14884-12-git-send-email-tiejun.chen@intel.com>
	<21932.63595.566823.211293@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<21934.8684.318670.874156@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
	<55AE272A.4020306@intel.com>
	<21934.10490.615041.203428@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <21934.10490.615041.203428@mariner.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 2015/7/21 19:11, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Chen, Tiejun writes ("Re: [v10][PATCH 11/16] tools/libxl: detect and avoid conflicts with RDM"):
>> I would add this check at the beginning of this function:
>>
>> assert(!d_config->num_rdms && !d_config->rdms).
>
> As Ian Campbell and I have explained, that is not OK.
>
> The caller may choose to pass both some rdms and strategy=host.
>
> The most obvious case is something like the following code
>
>    libxl_domain_config cfg;
>    cfg.stuff = blah;
>    cfg.rdm.strategy = HOST;
>
>    libxl_domain_create_new(&cfg, &domid);
>    libxl_domain_destroy(domid);

I'm not sure about this procedure, so do you mean this doesn't free 
d_config->num_rdms/d_config->rdms?

If not, I should double check this duplication so what about a return in 
the case of duplicating one entry?

static void
add_rdm_entry(libxl__gc *gc, libxl_domain_config *d_config,
               uint64_t rdm_start, uint64_t rdm_size, int rdm_policy)
{
     if (d_config->rdms)
     {
         unsigned int i;

         for (i = 0; i < d_config->num_rdms; i++)
         {
             if (d_config->rdms[i].start == rdm_start)
                 return;
         }
     }

     d_config->num_rdms++;
     d_config->rdms = libxl__realloc(NOGC, d_config->rdms,
                             d_config->num_rdms * sizeof(libxl_device_rdm));

     d_config->rdms[d_config->num_rdms - 1].start = rdm_start;
     d_config->rdms[d_config->num_rdms - 1].size = rdm_size;
     d_config->rdms[d_config->num_rdms - 1].policy = rdm_policy;
}

Thanks
Tiejun

>    libxl_domain_create_new(&cfg, &domid);
>
> which must work (and the second domain should have identical
> configuration to the first).
>
> Ian.
>