This is mostly to simplify future logical changes, but it does come with a
modest redunction in compiled code size (-55, 345 => 290).
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
---
CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
CC: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
CC: Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
CC: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
CC: Edwin Török <edvin.torok@citrix.com>
CC: Christian Lindig <christian.lindig@citrix.com>
CC: Pau Ruiz Safont <pau.safont@citrix.com>
---
xen/common/schedule.c | 14 +++++++++-----
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/common/schedule.c b/xen/common/schedule.c
index 66f1e26..47f5d04 100644
--- a/xen/common/schedule.c
+++ b/xen/common/schedule.c
@@ -1050,6 +1050,8 @@ static void domain_watchdog_timeout(void *data)
static long domain_watchdog(struct domain *d, uint32_t id, uint32_t timeout)
{
+ long rc = 0;
+
if ( id > NR_DOMAIN_WATCHDOG_TIMERS )
return -EINVAL;
@@ -1064,15 +1066,15 @@ static long domain_watchdog(struct domain *d, uint32_t id, uint32_t timeout)
set_timer(&d->watchdog_timer[id], NOW() + SECONDS(timeout));
break;
}
- spin_unlock(&d->watchdog_lock);
- return id == NR_DOMAIN_WATCHDOG_TIMERS ? -ENOSPC : id + 1;
+ rc = id == NR_DOMAIN_WATCHDOG_TIMERS ? -ENOSPC : id + 1;
+ goto unlock;
}
id -= 1;
if ( !test_bit(id, &d->watchdog_inuse_map) )
{
- spin_unlock(&d->watchdog_lock);
- return -EINVAL;
+ rc = -EINVAL;
+ goto unlock;
}
if ( timeout == 0 )
@@ -1085,8 +1087,10 @@ static long domain_watchdog(struct domain *d, uint32_t id, uint32_t timeout)
set_timer(&d->watchdog_timer[id], NOW() + SECONDS(timeout));
}
+ unlock:
spin_unlock(&d->watchdog_lock);
- return 0;
+
+ return rc;
}
void watchdog_domain_init(struct domain *d)
--
2.1.4
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-develOn 5/10/19 7:28 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: > This is mostly to simplify future logical changes, but it does come with a > modest redunction in compiled code size (-55, 345 => 290). > > No functional change. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> Reviewed-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@citrix.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
>>> On 10.05.19 at 20:28, <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
> --- a/xen/common/schedule.c
> +++ b/xen/common/schedule.c
> @@ -1050,6 +1050,8 @@ static void domain_watchdog_timeout(void *data)
>
> static long domain_watchdog(struct domain *d, uint32_t id, uint32_t timeout)
> {
> + long rc = 0;
I'm wondering why this isn't plain int. Not a big deal, but I'm
curious anyway.
As per your own response to patch 2 I understand that the
other patches in this series don#t need looking at until you
send a v2.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
On 13/05/2019 14:47, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 10.05.19 at 20:28, <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>> --- a/xen/common/schedule.c
>> +++ b/xen/common/schedule.c
>> @@ -1050,6 +1050,8 @@ static void domain_watchdog_timeout(void *data)
>>
>> static long domain_watchdog(struct domain *d, uint32_t id, uint32_t timeout)
>> {
>> + long rc = 0;
> I'm wondering why this isn't plain int. Not a big deal, but I'm
> curious anyway.
To match the return value. This function is compiled twice AFAICT.
>
> As per your own response to patch 2 I understand that the
> other patches in this series don#t need looking at until you
> send a v2.
patch 3 is independent of the ABI changes, so fine in principle to
review now.
Patches 2 and 4 will definitely need changing.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
>>> On 13.05.19 at 15:51, <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
> On 13/05/2019 14:47, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 10.05.19 at 20:28, <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/common/schedule.c
>>> +++ b/xen/common/schedule.c
>>> @@ -1050,6 +1050,8 @@ static void domain_watchdog_timeout(void *data)
>>>
>>> static long domain_watchdog(struct domain *d, uint32_t id, uint32_t timeout)
>>> {
>>> + long rc = 0;
>> I'm wondering why this isn't plain int. Not a big deal, but I'm
>> curious anyway.
>
> To match the return value.
But the compiler will happily sign-extend the value at the return statement.
> This function is compiled twice AFAICT.
I have no idea how this matters.
>> As per your own response to patch 2 I understand that the
>> other patches in this series don#t need looking at until you
>> send a v2.
>
> patch 3 is independent of the ABI changes, so fine in principle to
> review now.
Okay.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 07:28:01PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: > This is mostly to simplify future logical changes, but it does come with a > modest redunction in compiled code size (-55, 345 => 290). > > No functional change. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> Reviewed-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
© 2016 - 2021 Red Hat, Inc.