On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 03:52:56PM -0800, Axel Rasmussen wrote:
On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 3:10 PM Peter Xu peterx@redhat.com wrote:
Hi, Axel,
Looks mostly good to me, but a few nitpickings below.
On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 01:15:42PM -0800, Axel Rasmussen wrote:
[...]
+static void uffd_error(const char *message, __s64 code) +{
fprintf(stderr, "%s: %" PRId64 "\n", message, (int64_t)code);exit(1);+}
IMHO a macro that can take arbitrary parameters would be nicer, but if it satisfy our need, definitely ok too.
[...]
@@ -340,7 +348,8 @@ static void wp_range(int ufd, __u64 start, __u64 len, bool wp) prms.mode = wp ? UFFDIO_WRITEPROTECT_MODE_WP : 0;
if (ioctl(ufd, UFFDIO_WRITEPROTECT, &prms)) {
fprintf(stderr, "clear WP failed for address 0x%Lx\n", start);
fprintf(stderr, "clear WP failed for address 0x%" PRIx64 "\n",(uint64_t)start); exit(1);Is it intended to not use uffd_error() here?
Yes, this is intentional. This particular case prints the value in hexadecimal, rather than decimal.
(Agree that uffd_error() could be made more general to cover cases like this. I opted for the simplest thing which covers all but two cases - this one, and one where we "return 1;" instead of "exit(1);" - but I don't feel strongly.)
Actually it's as simple as:
#define uffd_error(...) do { \ fprintf(stderr, __VA_ARGS__); \ fprintf(stderr, "\n"); \ exit(1); \ } while (0)
But it's okay, I think.
}}
[...]
@@ -979,26 +981,20 @@ static int __uffdio_zeropage(int ufd, unsigned long offset, bool retry) if (ret) { /* real retval in ufdio_zeropage.zeropage */ if (has_zeropage) {
if (uffdio_zeropage.zeropage == -EEXIST) {fprintf(stderr, "UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE -EEXIST\n");exit(1);} else {fprintf(stderr, "UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE error %Ld\n",uffdio_zeropage.zeropage);exit(1);}
uffd_error(uffdio_zeropage.zeropage == -EEXIST ?"UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE -EEXIST" :"UFFDIO_ZEROPAGE error",Nit: The indents here are a bit odd..
This is what clang-format yields. Are you thinking it would be better to line everything up with the ( in uffd_error( ?
Or, perhaps this case is a good reason to make uffd_error() a variadic macro so we can insert "-EEXIST" || "error" with a "%s".
Yes. It fixes a build warning, so I think current patch is fine too.
No matter whether you'd like a v2, please feel free to take:
Acked-by: Peter Xu peterx@redhat.com
Thanks,