Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH] tools/libxl : add struct and parsing utils for the 'static_shm' xl config entry

[Zhongze Liu <blackskygg@xxxxxxxxx>]

2017-07-20 9:43 GMT+08:00 Zhongze Liu <blackskygg@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Hi Stefano,
>
> 2017-07-20 3:24 GMT+08:00 Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>> On Wed, 19 Jul 2017, Zhongze Liu wrote:
>>> Add a new struct libxl_static_shm in the libxl IDL for the proposed new xl
>>> config entry 'static_shm' (see [1]), which allow the user to set up shared
>>> memory areas among several VMs for communication.
>>>
>>> Add related parsing code to the libxl/libxlu_* family and xl/xl_parse.c
>>>
>>> [1]: [RFC v3]Proposal to allow setting up shared memory areas between VMs 
>>> from xl config file,
>>>      
>>> https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2017-07/msg01741.html
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Zhongze Liu <blackskygg@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> ---
>>>  tools/libxl/Makefile        |   2 +-
>>>  tools/libxl/libxl.h         |  10 ++
>>>  tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl |  52 +++++++++
>>>  tools/libxl/libxlu_sshm.c   | 274 
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  tools/libxl/libxlutil.h     |   6 +
>>>  tools/xl/xl_parse.c         |  24 +++-
>>>  6 files changed, 366 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 tools/libxl/libxlu_sshm.c
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/libxl/Makefile b/tools/libxl/Makefile
>>> index 2ffb78f5c4..b7effb188b 100644
>>> --- a/tools/libxl/Makefile
>>> +++ b/tools/libxl/Makefile
>>> @@ -175,7 +175,7 @@ AUTOINCS= libxlu_cfg_y.h libxlu_cfg_l.h _libxl_list.h 
>>> _paths.h \
>>>  AUTOSRCS= libxlu_cfg_y.c libxlu_cfg_l.c
>>>  AUTOSRCS += _libxl_save_msgs_callout.c _libxl_save_msgs_helper.c
>>>  LIBXLU_OBJS = libxlu_cfg_y.o libxlu_cfg_l.o libxlu_cfg.o \
>>> -     libxlu_disk_l.o libxlu_disk.o libxlu_vif.o libxlu_pci.o
>>> +     libxlu_disk_l.o libxlu_disk.o libxlu_vif.o libxlu_pci.o libxlu_sshm.o
>>>  $(LIBXLU_OBJS): CFLAGS += $(CFLAGS_libxenctrl) # For xentoollog.h
>>>
>>>  $(TEST_PROG_OBJS) _libxl.api-for-check: CFLAGS += $(CFLAGS_libxentoollog)
>>> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl.h b/tools/libxl/libxl.h
>>> index 7cf0f31f68..cf3cbe1ba1 100644
>>> --- a/tools/libxl/libxl.h
>>> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl.h
>>> @@ -2228,6 +2228,16 @@ int libxl_fd_set_nonblock(libxl_ctx *ctx, int fd, 
>>> int nonblock);
>>>  int libxl_qemu_monitor_command(libxl_ctx *ctx, uint32_t domid,
>>>                                 const char *command_line, char **output);
>>>
>>> +
>>> +/* Functions to stattically set up shared memory regions between two  
>>> domains
>>                      ^ statically                                      
>> ^double space
>>
>
> Sorry for the typos.
>
>>
>>> + * for shm-based communication. */
>>> +
>>> +#define LIBXL_SSHM_RANGE_UNKNOWN UINT64_MAX
>>> +
>>> +/* TODO: int libxl_sshm_add(libxl_ctx *ctx, uint32_t domid,
>>> + *                          libxl_static_shm *sshm);
>>> + */
>>> +
>>>  #include <libxl_event.h>
>>>
>>>  #endif /* LIBXL_H */
>>> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl b/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl
>>> index 8a9849c643..8c68b45add 100644
>>> --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl
>>> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_types.idl
>>> @@ -779,6 +779,57 @@ libxl_device_channel = Struct("device_channel", [
>>>             ])),
>>>  ])
>>>
>>> +# static shared memory cacheability attributes
>>> +libxl_sshm_cacheattr = Enumeration("sshm_cacheattr", [
>>> +    (-1, "UNKNOWN"),
>>> +    (0, "UC"),
>>> +    (1, "WC"),          #x86 only
>>> +    (4, "WT"),
>>> +    (5, "WP"),          #x86 only
>>> +    (6, "WB"),
>>> +    (7, "SUC"),         #x86 only
>>> +    (8, "BUFFERABLE"),  #ARM only
>>> +    (9, "WA"),          #ARM only
>>> +    ], init_val = "LIBXL_SSHM_CACHEATTR_UNKNOWN")
>>
>> I would only specify UNKNOWN and WB for now.
>
> For here and below, I actually want to left the checks for 'not
> implemented' errors
> to later stages of handling. The typical call flow of xl is like below:
>
> xl --> libxlu_* --> xl --> libxl_* --> hypercalls
>
> I was planning to check for options that are not implemented currently
> in the libxl_*.
>
>>
>>
>>> +# static shared memory shareability attributes
>>> +libxl_sshm_shareattr = Enumeration("sshm_shareattr", [
>>> +    (-1, "UNKNOWN"),
>>> +    (0, "NON"),
>>> +    (2, "OUTER"),
>>> +    (3, "INNER"),
>>> +    ], init_val = "LIBXL_SSHM_SHAREATTR_UNKNOWN")
>>> +
>>> +libxl_sshm_prot = Enumeration("sshm_prot", [
>>> +    (-1, "UNKNOWN"),
>>> +    (0, "N"),
>>> +    (1, "R"),
>>> +    (2, "W"),
>>> +    (4, "X"),
>>> +    (3, "RW"),
>>> +    (5, "RX"),
>>> +    (6, "WX"),
>>> +    (7, "RWX"),
>>> +    ], init_val = "LIBXL_SSHM_PROT_UNKNOWN")
>>> +
>>> +libxl_sshm_role = Enumeration("sshm_role", [
>>> +    (-1, "UNKNOWN"),
>>> +    (0, "MASTER"),
>>> +    (1, "SLAVE"),
>>> +    ], init_val = "LIBXL_SSHM_ROLE_UNKNOWN")
>>> +
>>> +libxl_static_shm = Struct("static_shm", [
>>> +    ("id", string),
>>> +    ("begin", uint64, {'init_val': 'LIBXL_SSHM_RANGE_UNKNOWN'}),
>>> +    ("end", uint64, {'init_val': 'LIBXL_SSHM_RANGE_UNKNOWN'}),
>>> +    ("prot", libxl_sshm_prot),
>>> +    ("arm_shareattr", libxl_sshm_shareattr),
>>> +    ("arm_inner_cacheattr", libxl_sshm_cacheattr),
>>> +    ("arm_outer_cacheattr", libxl_sshm_cacheattr),
>>
>> I would have a single arm_cacheattr
>
> Why? Am I supposed to use a '|' to combine inner and outer cacheattrs ?
>
>>
>>
>>> +    ("x86_cacheattr", libxl_sshm_cacheattr),
>>> +    ("role", libxl_sshm_role),
>>> +])
>>> +
>>>  libxl_domain_config = Struct("domain_config", [
>>>      ("c_info", libxl_domain_create_info),
>>>      ("b_info", libxl_domain_build_info),
>>> @@ -797,6 +848,7 @@ libxl_domain_config = Struct("domain_config", [
>>>      ("channels", Array(libxl_device_channel, "num_channels")),
>>>      ("usbctrls", Array(libxl_device_usbctrl, "num_usbctrls")),
>>>      ("usbdevs", Array(libxl_device_usbdev, "num_usbdevs")),
>>> +    ("sshms", Array(libxl_static_shm, "num_sshms")),
>>>
>>>      ("on_poweroff", libxl_action_on_shutdown),
>>>      ("on_reboot", libxl_action_on_shutdown),
>>> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxlu_sshm.c b/tools/libxl/libxlu_sshm.c
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000000..fcd65af4d9
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxlu_sshm.c
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,274 @@
>>> +#include "libxl_osdeps.h" /* must come before any other headers */
>>> +#include "libxlu_internal.h"
>>> +
>>> +#include <ctype.h>
>>> +
>>> +#define PARAM_RE(EXPR) "^\\s*" EXPR "\\s*(,|$)"
>>> +#define KEY_RE         "([_a-zA-Z0-9]+)"
>>> +#define VAL_RE         "([^ \t\n,]+)"
>>> +#define EQU_RE         PARAM_RE(KEY_RE "\\s*=\\s*" VAL_RE)
>>> +
>>> +#define MASK_4K        ((uint64_t)0xfff)
>>> +#define MAX_ID_LEN     128
>>> +#define CACHEATTR_ARM  0
>>> +#define CACHEATTR_X86  1
>>> +
>>> +#define INVAL_ERR(msg, curr_str)  do {              \
>>> +        xlu__sshm_err(cfg, msg, curr_str);          \
>>> +        rc = EINVAL;                                \
>>> +        goto out;                                   \
>>> +    } while(0)
>>> +
>>> +/* set a member in libxl_static_shm and report an error if it's 
>>> respecified,
>>> + * @curr_str indicates the head of the remaining string. */
>>> +#define SET_VAL(var, name, type, value, curr_str)  do {                 \
>>> +        if ((var) != LIBXL_SSHM_##type##_UNKNOWN && (var) != value) {   \
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("\"" name "\" respecified", curr_str);            \
>>> +        }                                                               \
>>> +        (var) = value;                                                  \
>>> +    } while(0)
>>> +
>>> +
>>> +static void xlu__sshm_err(XLU_Config *cfg, const char *msg,
>>> +                          const char *curr_str) {
>>> +    fprintf(cfg->report,
>>> +            "%s: config parsing error in shared_memory: %s at '%s'\n",
>>> +            cfg->config_source, msg, curr_str);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int parse_prot(XLU_Config *cfg, char *str, libxl_sshm_prot *prot)
>>> +{
>>> +    int rc;
>>> +    libxl_sshm_prot new_prot;
>>> +
>>> +    if (!strcmp(str, "r") || !strcmp(str, "ro")) {
>>> +        new_prot = LIBXL_SSHM_PROT_R;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "w") || !strcmp(str, "wo")) {
>>> +        new_prot = LIBXL_SSHM_PROT_W;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "x") || !strcmp(str, "xo")) {
>>> +        new_prot = LIBXL_SSHM_PROT_X;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "rw")) {
>>> +        new_prot = LIBXL_SSHM_PROT_RW;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "rx")) {
>>> +        new_prot = LIBXL_SSHM_PROT_RX;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "wx")) {
>>> +        new_prot = LIBXL_SSHM_PROT_WX;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "rwx")) {
>>> +        new_prot = LIBXL_SSHM_PROT_RWX;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "n")) {
>>> +        new_prot = LIBXL_SSHM_PROT_N;
>>> +    } else {
>>> +        INVAL_ERR("invalid permission flags", str);
>>
>> shouldn't this return an error?
>
> This macro does return an error. but it seems that the naming is not
> very appropriate. may I should change it to RET_INVAL or something?
>
>>
>>
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    SET_VAL(*prot, "permission flags", PROT, new_prot, str);
>>> +
>>> +    rc = 0;
>>> +
>>> + out:
>>> +    return rc;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int parse_cacheattr(XLU_Config *cfg, char *str, int arch,
>>> +                           libxl_sshm_cacheattr *cattr)
>>> +{
>>> +    int rc;
>>> +    libxl_sshm_cacheattr new_cattr;
>>> +
>>> +    if (!strcmp(str, "uc")) {
>>> +        new_cattr = LIBXL_SSHM_CACHEATTR_UC;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "wc")) {
>>> +        if (CACHEATTR_X86 != arch) {
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("invalid cacheability attribute", str);
>>> +        }
>>> +        new_cattr = LIBXL_SSHM_CACHEATTR_WC;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "wt")) {
>>> +        new_cattr = LIBXL_SSHM_CACHEATTR_WT;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "wp")) {
>>> +        if (CACHEATTR_X86 != arch) {
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("invalid cacheability attribute", str);
>>> +        }
>>> +        new_cattr = LIBXL_SSHM_CACHEATTR_WP;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "wb")) {
>>> +        new_cattr = LIBXL_SSHM_CACHEATTR_WB;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "suc")) {
>>> +        if (CACHEATTR_X86 != arch) {
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("invalid cacheability attribute", str);
>>> +        }
>>> +        new_cattr = LIBXL_SSHM_CACHEATTR_SUC;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "bufferable")) {
>>> +        if (CACHEATTR_ARM != arch) {
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("invalid cacheability attribute", str);
>>> +        }
>>> +        new_cattr = LIBXL_SSHM_CACHEATTR_BUFFERABLE;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "wa")) {
>>> +        if (CACHEATTR_ARM != arch) {
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("invalid cacheability attribute", str);
>>> +        }
>>> +        new_cattr = LIBXL_SSHM_CACHEATTR_WA;
>>> +    } else {
>>> +        INVAL_ERR("invalid cacheability attribute", str);
>>
>> shouldn't this return an error?
>>
>>
>>> +    }
>>
>> I don't know if the other maintainers agree, but I think we should just
>> check that str is "wb" and fail in all other cases.
>
> Just as pointed out above, I prefer to implement all the options in this part
> of the code, since parsing and actual handling are two somewhat independent
> parts. The checks for options that are not implemented could be left to later
> stages.
>
>>
>>
>>> +    SET_VAL(*cattr, "cacheability attributes", CACHEATTR, new_cattr, str);
>>> +    rc = 0;
>>> +
>>> + out:
>>> +    return rc;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int parse_shareattr(XLU_Config *cfg, char *str,
>>> +                           libxl_sshm_shareattr *sattr)
>>> +{
>>> +    int rc;
>>> +    libxl_sshm_shareattr new_sattr;
>>> +
>>> +    if (!strcmp(str, "non")) {
>>> +        new_sattr = LIBXL_SSHM_SHAREATTR_NON;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "outer")) {
>>> +        new_sattr = LIBXL_SSHM_SHAREATTR_OUTER;
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(str, "inner")) {
>>> +        new_sattr = LIBXL_SSHM_SHAREATTR_INNER;
>>> +    } else {
>>> +        INVAL_ERR("invalid arm shareability attribute", str);
>>
>> shouldn't this return an error?
>>
>>
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    SET_VAL(*sattr, "arm shareability attributes", SHAREATTR, new_sattr, 
>>> str);
>>> +    rc = 0;
>>> +
>>> + out:
>>> +    return rc;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +/* handle key = value pairs */
>>> +static int handle_equ(XLU_Config *cfg, char *key, char *val,
>>> +                      libxl_static_shm *sshm)
>>> +{
>>> +    int rc;
>>> +
>>> +    if (!strcmp(key, "id")) {
>>> +        if (strlen(val) > MAX_ID_LEN) { INVAL_ERR("id too long", val); }
>>> +        if (sshm->id && !strcmp(sshm->id, val)) {
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("id respecified", val);
>>> +        }
>>> +
>>> +        if (NULL == (sshm->id = strdup(val))) {
>>> +            fprintf(stderr, "sshm parser out of memory\n");
>>> +            rc = ENOMEM;
>>> +            goto out;
>>> +        }
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(key, "role")) {
>>> +        libxl_sshm_role new_role;
>>> +
>>> +        if (!strcmp("master", val)) {
>>> +            new_role = LIBXL_SSHM_ROLE_MASTER;
>>> +        } else if (!strcmp("slave", val)) {
>>> +            new_role = LIBXL_SSHM_ROLE_SLAVE;
>>> +        } else {
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("invalid role", val);
>>> +        }
>>> +
>>> +        SET_VAL(sshm->role, "role", ROLE, new_role, val);
>>> +
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(key, "begin") || !strcmp(key, "end")) {
>>> +        char *endptr;
>>> +        int base = 10;
>>> +        uint64_t new_bound;
>>> +
>>> +        /* could be in hex form */
>>> +        if ('0' == val[0] && 'x' == val[1]) { base = 16; }
>>
>> Shouldn't you check that val is at least 2 in length?
>
> Yes. Sorry. I will fix this.

When I tried to add some length checking here I recalled that I have
thought about this problem already and this isn't going to cause troubles.
Because I've already made both key and val NULL-terminated strings.
If the length is 0, val[0] will be '0' and the && will be short-circuit'ed.
If the length is 1, the second check will fail because val[1] will be '0'.

>
>>
>>
>>> +        new_bound = strtoull(val, &endptr, base);
>>> +        if (ERANGE == errno || *endptr) {
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("invalid begin/end", val);
>>> +        }
>>> +        if (new_bound & MASK_4K) {
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("begin/end is not a multiple of 4K", val);
>>> +        }
>>> +
>>> +        /* begin or end */
>>> +        if ('b' == key[0]) {
>>> +            SET_VAL(sshm->begin, "beginning address", RANGE, new_bound, 
>>> val);
>>> +        } else {
>>> +            SET_VAL(sshm->end, "ending address", RANGE, new_bound, val);
>>> +        }
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(key, "prot")) {
>>> +        rc = parse_prot(cfg, val, &sshm->prot);
>>> +        if (rc) { goto out; }
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(key, "arm_inner_cacheattr")) {
>>> +        rc = parse_cacheattr(cfg, val, CACHEATTR_ARM,
>>> +                             &sshm->arm_inner_cacheattr);
>>> +        if (rc) { goto out; }
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(key, "arm_outer_cacheattr")) {
>>> +        rc = parse_cacheattr(cfg, val, CACHEATTR_ARM,
>>> +                             &sshm->arm_outer_cacheattr);
>>> +        if (rc) { goto out; }
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(key, "x86_cacheattr")) {
>>> +        rc = parse_cacheattr(cfg, val, CACHEATTR_X86,
>>> +                             &sshm->x86_cacheattr);
>>> +        if (rc) { goto out; }
>>> +    } else if (!strcmp(key, "arm_shareattr")) {
>>> +        rc = parse_shareattr(cfg, val, &sshm->arm_shareattr);
>>> +        if (rc) { goto out; }
>>> +    } else {
>>> +        INVAL_ERR("invalid option", key);
>>
>> shouldn't this return an error?
>>
>>
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    rc = 0;
>>> +
>>> + out:
>>> +    return rc;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +int xlu_sshm_parse(XLU_Config *cfg, const char *spec,
>>> +                   libxl_static_shm *sshm)
>>> +{
>>> +    int rc;
>>> +    regex_t equ_rec;
>>> +    char *buf2 = NULL, *ptr = NULL;
>>> +    regmatch_t pmatch[3];
>>> +
>>> +    rc = regcomp(&equ_rec, EQU_RE, REG_EXTENDED);
>>> +    if (rc) {
>>> +        fprintf(stderr, "sshm parser failed to initialize\n");
>>> +        goto out;
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    if (NULL == (buf2 = ptr = strdup(spec))) {
>>> +        fprintf(stderr, "sshm parser out of memory\n");
>>> +        rc = ENOMEM;
>>> +        goto out;
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    while (true) {
>>> +        if (!*ptr) { break; }
>>> +        if (regexec(&equ_rec, ptr, 3, pmatch, 0)) {
>>> +            INVAL_ERR("unrecognized token", ptr);
>>> +        }
>>> +
>>> +        ptr[pmatch[1].rm_eo] = '\0';
>>> +        ptr[pmatch[2].rm_eo] = '\0';
>>> +        rc = handle_equ(cfg, ptr + pmatch[1].rm_so,
>>> +                        ptr + pmatch[2].rm_so, sshm);
>>> +        if (rc) { goto out; }
>>> +
>>> +        ptr += pmatch[0].rm_eo;
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    if (*ptr) { INVAL_ERR("invalid syntax", ptr); }
>>> +
>>> +    rc = 0;
>>> +
>>> + out:
>>> +    if (buf2) { free(buf2); }
>>> +    regfree(&equ_rec);
>>> +    return rc;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +/*
>>> + * Local variables:
>>> + * mode: C
>>> + * c-basic-offset: 4
>>> + * indent-tabs-mode: nil
>>> + * End:
>>> + */
>>> +
>>> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxlutil.h b/tools/libxl/libxlutil.h
>>> index e81b644c01..ee39cb5bdc 100644
>>> --- a/tools/libxl/libxlutil.h
>>> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxlutil.h
>>> @@ -118,6 +118,12 @@ int xlu_rdm_parse(XLU_Config *cfg, libxl_rdm_reserve 
>>> *rdm, const char *str);
>>>  int xlu_vif_parse_rate(XLU_Config *cfg, const char *rate,
>>>                         libxl_device_nic *nic);
>>>
>>> +/*
>>> + * static shared memory specification parsing
>>> + */
>>> +int xlu_sshm_parse(XLU_Config *cfg, const char *spec,
>>> +                   libxl_static_shm *sshm);
>>> +
>>>  #endif /* LIBXLUTIL_H */
>>>
>>>  /*
>>> diff --git a/tools/xl/xl_parse.c b/tools/xl/xl_parse.c
>>> index 5c2bf17222..82d955b8b9 100644
>>> --- a/tools/xl/xl_parse.c
>>> +++ b/tools/xl/xl_parse.c
>>> @@ -813,7 +813,7 @@ void parse_config_data(const char *config_source,
>>>      long l, vcpus = 0;
>>>      XLU_Config *config;
>>>      XLU_ConfigList *cpus, *vbds, *nics, *pcis, *cvfbs, *cpuids, *vtpms,
>>> -                   *usbctrls, *usbdevs, *p9devs;
>>> +                   *usbctrls, *usbdevs, *p9devs, *sshms;
>>>      XLU_ConfigList *channels, *ioports, *irqs, *iomem, *viridian, *dtdevs,
>>>                     *mca_caps;
>>>      int num_ioports, num_irqs, num_iomem, num_cpus, num_viridian, 
>>> num_mca_caps;
>>> @@ -1392,6 +1392,28 @@ void parse_config_data(const char *config_source,
>>>          }
>>>      }
>>>
>>> +    if (!xlu_cfg_get_list (config, "static_shm", &sshms, 0, 0)) {
>>> +        d_config->num_sshms = 0;
>>> +        d_config->sshms = NULL;
>>> +        while ((buf = xlu_cfg_get_listitem (sshms, d_config->num_sshms)) 
>>> != NULL) {
>>> +            libxl_static_shm *sshm;
>>> +            char *buf2 = strdup(buf);
>>> +            int ret;
>>> +
>>> +            sshm = ARRAY_EXTEND_INIT_NODEVID(d_config->sshms,
>>> +                                             d_config->num_sshms,
>>> +                                             libxl_static_shm_init);
>>> +            ret = xlu_sshm_parse(config, buf2, sshm);
>>> +            if (ret) {
>>> +                fprintf(stderr,
>>> +                        "xl: Invalid argument for static_shm: %s", buf2);
>>> +                exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>>> +            }
>>> +
>>> +            free(buf2);
>>> +        }
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>>      if (!xlu_cfg_get_list(config, "p9", &p9devs, 0, 0)) {
>>>          libxl_device_p9 *p9;
>>>          char *security_model = NULL;
>>> --
>>> 2.13.3
>>>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Zhongze Liu

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel