Re: [PATCH v9 for Xen 4.7 3/4] libxl: enable per-VCPU parameter for RTDS

From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Chong Li <lichong659@gmail.com>
Cc: Chong Li <chong.li@wustl.edu>, Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
	Sisu Xi <xisisu@gmail.com>,
	George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
	Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>,
	Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com>,
	xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
	Meng Xu <mengxu@cis.upenn.edu>,
	Dagaen Golomb <dgolomb@seas.upenn.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 for Xen 4.7 3/4] libxl: enable per-VCPU parameter for RTDS
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2016 20:23:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <57056232.3040102@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGHO-irt1GN9CkNyvon4gFcrnoTTaR_-g32=wdqxYFUV4jikeQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 06/04/16 20:20, Chong Li wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>> On 06/04/16 17:41, Chong Li wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Dario Faggioli
>>> <dario.faggioli@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 2016-04-06 at 16:38 +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>>>> Ian Jackson writes ("Re: [PATCH v9 for Xen 4.7 3/4] libxl: enable
>>>>> per-VCPU parameter for RTDS"):
>>>>>> Dario points out on irc that perhaps the problem is that I didn't
>>>>>> apply 2/4.  I wasn't CC'd on 2/4, so I foolishly assumed it was a
>>>>>> hypervisor patch (and the HV parts are already in tree).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will check my view of the xen-devel list.
>>>>> Indeed.  With 2/4 it builds.  4/4 was also not CC'd to me.  I used a
>>>>> copy from the list.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have pushed all four.
>>>>>
>>>> Thanks Ian!
>>>>
>>>> So, Chong, clearly, the build failure was not your fault (as there is
>>>> no actual build failure), but please, always double check (even when
>>>> sending new versions of a series) that the appropriate maintainers are
>>>> Cc-ed... This would help limiting problems like this one we've seen
>>>> here.
>>>>
>>> Yes, I'll.
>>>
>>> Thanks for your help on this.
>>> Chong
>> Yet another build failure on CentOS.
>>
>> xc_rt.c: In function 'xc_sched_rtds_vcpu_set':
>> xc_rt.c:71:9: error: 'rc' may be used uninitialized in this function
>> [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
>>      int rc;
>>          ^
>> xc_rt.c: In function 'xc_sched_rtds_vcpu_get':
>> xc_rt.c:105:9: error: 'rc' may be used uninitialized in this function
>> [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
>>      int rc;
>>          ^
>> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>>
>> In both cases, if your while loop doesn't execute (i.e. the user passes
>> num_vcpus = 0), rc is genuinely uninialised when used at the end of the
>> function.
>>
>> ~Andrew
> I see. I can do a sanity check on num_vcpus before the while loop.
>
> Do I have to re-send the whole patch series? Or maybe just something
> like a bug fix patch?

The series has been committed.

Please send a new patch based on top of the existing `staging` branch.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel