Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen/grant-table: correctly initializegrant table version 1

[annie li]

On 2013-1-9 20:02, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 02:40 +0000, ANNIE LI wrote:
>   
> > > @@ -1080,18 +1081,18 @@ static void gnttab_request_version(void)
> > >   		panic("we need grant tables version 2, but only version 1 is available");
> > >   	} else {
> > >   		grant_table_version = 1;
> > > +		grefs_per_grant_frame = PAGE_SIZE / sizeof(struct grant_entry_v1);
> > >   		gnttab_interface =&gnttab_v1_ops;
> > >   	}
> > > -	printk(KERN_INFO "Grant tables using version %d layout.\n",
> > > -		grant_table_version);
> > >   }
> > >   
> > >       
> > Is it better to keep printk here? In your last patch, you removed it 
> > because gnttab_request_version and gnttab_resume are all called in 
> > gnttab_init. and gnttab_resume also contains calling of 
> > gnttab_request_version. But in this patch, gnttab_setup is used, and 
> > does not have this issue now.
> >     
>
> Yes, I think we want to print this at both start of day and resume?
>   
Right.
> Either by adding a print to gnttab_resume()
Only adding a print into gnttab_resume() would miss this print at start 
of day. In gnttab_init, gnttab_request_version and gnttab_setup are 
called, not gnttab_resume.
>  or by keeping the existing
> one here in preference to moving it to gnttab_setup(). I'd prefer the
> latter to avoid the duplication, unless I'm mistaken and request_version
> is called in more than those two locations.
>   
Yes, I'd like the latter. Request_version is only called in those two 
locations.

Thanks
Annie
> Ian.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
>   
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/