WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] evtchn_do_upcall: Fix logic to start correctly a

To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] evtchn_do_upcall: Fix logic to start correctly at "last processed port + 1"
From: Kaushik Kumar Ram <kaushik@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 03:04:01 -0600
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:04:25 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C7885033.8093%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <C7885033.8093%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I don't see changeset linux-2.6.18-xen:988. I agree pre-incrementing is better. 
I am fine as long as the code is fixed.

-Kaushik

On Jan 29, 2010, at 2:43 AM, Keir Fraser wrote:

> On 29/01/2010 05:34, "Kaushik Kumar Ram" <kaushik@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> # HG changeset patch
>> # User kaushik
>> # Date 1264742860 21600
>> # Node ID de3e05e5eec28aa332ae1aa35a2edf97ded769f5
>> # Parent  91224343eeee460c9aafdaadc1bdedab54e92256
>> Fix the logic to start correctly at "last processed port + 1" in
>> evtchn_do_upcall.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Kaushik Kumar Ram <kaushik@xxxxxxxx>
> 
> Take a look at linux-2.6.18-xen:988, which is a (significant)
> reinterpretation of your patch. I think some confusion and bugs arise from
> pre-incrementing the loop indexes, so I changed back to post-incrementing as
> we used to do. I think the code is a fair bit clearer. Hopefully it also
> works just as well!
> 
> Thanks,
> Keir
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> 


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel