>>> On 06.05.15 at 14:32, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote: > El 06/05/15 a les 14.10, Jan Beulich ha escrit: >>>>> On 06.05.15 at 13:55, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote: >>> El 14/04/15 a les 14.14, Jan Beulich ha escrit: >>>>>>> On 10.04.15 at 19:29, <roger....@citrix.com> wrote: >>>>> + BUG_ON(((pages >> 3) % PAGE_SIZE) + bytes > >>>>> PAGE_SIZE); >>>> >>>> I don't seem to be able to spot the original for this one. If there >>>> was none, please make this an ASSERT() instead. >>> >>> Yes, there's no previous BUG_ON because this was not a problem in the >>> past, since we could write to any position on dirty_bitmap, but that's >>> not the case any more. Since we only have one page mapped at a time we >>> need to make sure that what we are about to write doesn't cross a page >>> boundary. >>> >>> I understand this is not an ideal solution, but AFAICT there's no easy >>> way to deal with writes that expand over a page boundary. >> >> I'm afraid I don't really see what you're asking for. Just to clarify - >> I didn't put anything under question, all I asked for was to use >> ASSERT() instead of BUG_ON() here. Yet what you wrote above >> doesn't seem to related to that request. > > I don't think an ASSERT is appropriate here, because it means that on > non-debug versions we might write past the end of the mapped page > without noticing.
With that argumentation there shouldn't be any ASSERT()s, but only BUG_ON()s. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
