tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Commit f089fddd94 "xen: report PV capability in sysctl and use it in
toolstack" changed meaning of virt_caps bit 1 - previously it was
"directio", but was changed to "pv" and "directio" was moved to bit 2.
Adjust python wrapper, and add reporting of both "pv_directio" and
"hvm_directio".
Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com>
---
This should be backported to 4.12
Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>
---
tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c | 7 ++++++-
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c b/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
index cc8175a11e..0a8d8f407e 100644
--- a/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
+++ b/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
@@ -973,7 +973,8 @@ static PyObject *pyxc_physinfo(XcObject *self)
xc_physinfo_t pinfo;
char cpu_cap[128], virt_caps[128], *p;
int i;
- const char *virtcap_names[] = { "hvm", "hvm_directio" };
+ const char *virtcap_names[] = { "hvm", "pv",
+ "hvm_directio", "pv_directio" };
if ( xc_physinfo(self->xc_handle, &pinfo) != 0 )
return pyxc_error_to_exception(self->xc_handle);
@@ -989,6 +990,10 @@ static PyObject *pyxc_physinfo(XcObject *self)
for ( i = 0; i < 2; i++ )
if ( (pinfo.capabilities >> i) & 1 )
p += sprintf(p, "%s ", virtcap_names[i]);
+ if (pinfo.capabilities & XEN_SYSCTL_PHYSCAP_directio)
+ for ( i = 0; i < 2; i++ )
+ if ( (pinfo.capabilities >> i) & 1 )
+ p += sprintf(p, "%s ", virtcap_names[i+2]);
if ( p != virt_caps )
*(p-1) = '\0';
--
2.17.2
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 09:08:23PM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > Commit f089fddd94 "xen: report PV capability in sysctl and use it in > toolstack" changed meaning of virt_caps bit 1 - previously it was > "directio", but was changed to "pv" and "directio" was moved to bit 2. > Adjust python wrapper, and add reporting of both "pv_directio" and > "hvm_directio". > > Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com> Acked-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com> _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki writes ("[PATCH] python: Adjust xc_physinfo wrapper for updated virt_caps bits"):
> Commit f089fddd94 "xen: report PV capability in sysctl and use it in
> toolstack" changed meaning of virt_caps bit 1 - previously it was
> "directio", but was changed to "pv" and "directio" was moved to bit 2.
> Adjust python wrapper, and add reporting of both "pv_directio" and
> "hvm_directio".
Thanks for your attention to this...
But:
> index cc8175a11e..0a8d8f407e 100644
> --- a/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
> +++ b/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
> @@ -973,7 +973,8 @@ static PyObject *pyxc_physinfo(XcObject *self)
> xc_physinfo_t pinfo;
> char cpu_cap[128], virt_caps[128], *p;
> int i;
> - const char *virtcap_names[] = { "hvm", "hvm_directio" };
> + const char *virtcap_names[] = { "hvm", "pv",
> + "hvm_directio", "pv_directio" };
It seems quite wrong that we have no way to keep this in sync - and
not even comments in both places! (This is not your fault...)
> @@ -989,6 +990,10 @@ static PyObject *pyxc_physinfo(XcObject *self)
> for ( i = 0; i < 2; i++ )
> if ( (pinfo.capabilities >> i) & 1 )
> p += sprintf(p, "%s ", virtcap_names[i]);
> + if (pinfo.capabilities & XEN_SYSCTL_PHYSCAP_directio)
> + for ( i = 0; i < 2; i++ )
> + if ( (pinfo.capabilities >> i) & 1 )
> + p += sprintf(p, "%s ", virtcap_names[i+2]);
> if ( p != virt_caps )
> *(p-1) = '\0';
I'm not sure I like this. AFAICT the +2 is magic, and you in fact
treat the two halves of this array together as a single array. So
this should either be two arrays, or, more likely, something like this
maybe:
+ p += sprintf(p, "%s_directio ", virtcap_names[i]);
What do you think ?
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:16:26AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Marek Marczykowski-Górecki writes ("[PATCH] python: Adjust xc_physinfo wrapper for updated virt_caps bits"):
> > Commit f089fddd94 "xen: report PV capability in sysctl and use it in
> > toolstack" changed meaning of virt_caps bit 1 - previously it was
> > "directio", but was changed to "pv" and "directio" was moved to bit 2.
> > Adjust python wrapper, and add reporting of both "pv_directio" and
> > "hvm_directio".
>
> Thanks for your attention to this...
>
> But:
>
> > index cc8175a11e..0a8d8f407e 100644
> > --- a/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
> > +++ b/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
> > @@ -973,7 +973,8 @@ static PyObject *pyxc_physinfo(XcObject *self)
> > xc_physinfo_t pinfo;
> > char cpu_cap[128], virt_caps[128], *p;
> > int i;
> > - const char *virtcap_names[] = { "hvm", "hvm_directio" };
> > + const char *virtcap_names[] = { "hvm", "pv",
> > + "hvm_directio", "pv_directio" };
>
> It seems quite wrong that we have no way to keep this in sync - and
> not even comments in both places! (This is not your fault...)
I'll add a comment...
> > @@ -989,6 +990,10 @@ static PyObject *pyxc_physinfo(XcObject *self)
> > for ( i = 0; i < 2; i++ )
> > if ( (pinfo.capabilities >> i) & 1 )
> > p += sprintf(p, "%s ", virtcap_names[i]);
> > + if (pinfo.capabilities & XEN_SYSCTL_PHYSCAP_directio)
> > + for ( i = 0; i < 2; i++ )
> > + if ( (pinfo.capabilities >> i) & 1 )
> > + p += sprintf(p, "%s ", virtcap_names[i+2]);
> > if ( p != virt_caps )
> > *(p-1) = '\0';
>
> I'm not sure I like this. AFAICT the +2 is magic, and you in fact
> treat the two halves of this array together as a single array. So
> this should either be two arrays, or, more likely, something like this
> maybe:
>
> + p += sprintf(p, "%s_directio ", virtcap_names[i]);
>
> What do you think ?
Makes sense.
--
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 12:08:38AM +0200, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 11:16:26AM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Marek Marczykowski-Górecki writes ("[PATCH] python: Adjust xc_physinfo wrapper for updated virt_caps bits"):
> > > Commit f089fddd94 "xen: report PV capability in sysctl and use it in
> > > toolstack" changed meaning of virt_caps bit 1 - previously it was
> > > "directio", but was changed to "pv" and "directio" was moved to bit 2.
> > > Adjust python wrapper, and add reporting of both "pv_directio" and
> > > "hvm_directio".
> >
> > Thanks for your attention to this...
> >
> > But:
> >
> > > index cc8175a11e..0a8d8f407e 100644
> > > --- a/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
> > > +++ b/tools/python/xen/lowlevel/xc/xc.c
> > > @@ -973,7 +973,8 @@ static PyObject *pyxc_physinfo(XcObject *self)
> > > xc_physinfo_t pinfo;
> > > char cpu_cap[128], virt_caps[128], *p;
> > > int i;
> > > - const char *virtcap_names[] = { "hvm", "hvm_directio" };
> > > + const char *virtcap_names[] = { "hvm", "pv",
> > > + "hvm_directio", "pv_directio" };
> >
> > It seems quite wrong that we have no way to keep this in sync - and
> > not even comments in both places! (This is not your fault...)
>
> I'll add a comment...
Actually, this would work much better if the loop below would use
#defines from sysctl.h, instead of hardcoded values. I'll update it this
way.
> > > @@ -989,6 +990,10 @@ static PyObject *pyxc_physinfo(XcObject *self)
> > > for ( i = 0; i < 2; i++ )
> > > if ( (pinfo.capabilities >> i) & 1 )
> > > p += sprintf(p, "%s ", virtcap_names[i]);
> > > + if (pinfo.capabilities & XEN_SYSCTL_PHYSCAP_directio)
> > > + for ( i = 0; i < 2; i++ )
> > > + if ( (pinfo.capabilities >> i) & 1 )
> > > + p += sprintf(p, "%s ", virtcap_names[i+2]);
> > > if ( p != virt_caps )
> > > *(p-1) = '\0';
> >
> > I'm not sure I like this. AFAICT the +2 is magic, and you in fact
> > treat the two halves of this array together as a single array. So
> > this should either be two arrays, or, more likely, something like this
> > maybe:
> >
> > + p += sprintf(p, "%s_directio ", virtcap_names[i]);
> >
> > What do you think ?
>
> Makes sense.
>
--
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.