On Mon, 2017-09-11 at 12:37 +0800, Haozhong Zhang wrote: > The current check refuses the hot-plugged memory that falls in one > unused PDX group, which should be allowed.
Looks reasonable to me. The only thing I can think of is you can double check if the following find_next_zero_bit/find_next_bit will still work. Chao > > Signed-off-by: Haozhong Zhang <haozhong.zh...@intel.com> > --- > Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> > --- > xen/arch/x86/x86_64/mm.c | 6 +----- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/mm.c b/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/mm.c > index 11746730b4..6c5221f90c 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/mm.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/mm.c > @@ -1296,12 +1296,8 @@ static int mem_hotadd_check(unsigned long spfn, > unsigned long epfn) > return 0; > > /* Make sure the new range is not present now */ > - sidx = ((pfn_to_pdx(spfn) + PDX_GROUP_COUNT - 1) & > ~(PDX_GROUP_COUNT - 1)) > - / PDX_GROUP_COUNT; > + sidx = (pfn_to_pdx(spfn) & ~(PDX_GROUP_COUNT - 1)) / > PDX_GROUP_COUNT; > eidx = (pfn_to_pdx(epfn - 1) & ~(PDX_GROUP_COUNT - 1)) / > PDX_GROUP_COUNT; > - if (sidx >= eidx) > - return 0; > - > s = find_next_zero_bit(pdx_group_valid, eidx, sidx); > if ( s > eidx ) > return 0; _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
