On 9/22/21 13:52, Greg Kurz wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2021 13:17:32 +0200
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> wrote:
On 9/21/21 21:43, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
This patch has a handful of modifications for the recent added
FORM2 support:
- there is no particular reason for both 'lookup_index_table' and
'distance_table' to be allocated in the heap, since their sizes are
known right at the start of the function. Use static allocation in
them to spare a couple of g_new0() calls;
- to not allocate more than the necessary size in 'distance_table'. At
this moment the array is oversized due to allocating uint32_t for all
elements, when most of them fits in an uint8_t;
- create a NUMA_LOCAL_DISTANCE macro to avoid hardcoding the local
distance value.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb...@gmail.com>
---
hw/ppc/spapr_numa.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++----------------
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
/*
* Retrieves max_dist_ref_points of the current NUMA affinity.
*/
@@ -500,17 +503,21 @@ static void
spapr_numa_FORM2_write_rtas_tables(SpaprMachineState *spapr,
MachineState *ms = MACHINE(spapr);
NodeInfo *numa_info = ms->numa_state->nodes;
int nb_numa_nodes = ms->numa_state->num_nodes;
+ /* Lookup index table has an extra uint32_t with its length */
+ uint32_t lookup_index_table[nb_numa_nodes + 1];
int distance_table_entries = nb_numa_nodes * nb_numa_nodes;
- g_autofree uint32_t *lookup_index_table = NULL;
- g_autofree uint32_t *distance_table = NULL;
- int src, dst, i, distance_table_size;
- uint8_t *node_distances;
This should have be of ptrdiff_t type.
Why ? I don't see pointer subtraction in the code.
Oops, you are right.
