On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 06:20:22PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 05:04:14PM +0800, Hu Tao wrote:
> > ..to prevent one memory backend from being used by more than one numa
> > node.
>
> Thanks, but please always make the msg content self-contained
> so it can be understood without the subject.
> E.g. here, just drop "..to".
>
> Are you sure we want this? Is there a chance sharing a backend
> can be useful?
This patch is actually a bug fix. Even if we will want backend sharing, we
can do it after.
>
> Igor, what's your take?
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Hu Tao <hu...@cn.fujitsu.com>
> > ---
> > numa.c | 7 +++++++
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/numa.c b/numa.c
> > index e471afe..6c1c554 100644
> > --- a/numa.c
> > +++ b/numa.c
> > @@ -279,6 +279,13 @@ void memory_region_allocate_system_memory(MemoryRegion
> > *mr, Object *owner,
> > exit(1);
> > }
> >
> > + if (memory_region_is_mapped(seg)) {
> > + char *path =
> > object_get_canonical_path_component(OBJECT(backend));
> > + error_report("memory backend %s is busy", path);
> > + g_free(path);
> > + exit(1);
> > + }
> > +
> > memory_region_add_subregion(mr, addr, seg);
> > vmstate_register_ram_global(seg);
> > addr += size;
> > --
> > 1.9.3
