lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 12/12] Unplug emulated disks and nics
On 06/17/2010 04:42 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>
>>> +#if (defined(CONFIG_XEN_NETDEV_FRONTEND) || \
>>> + defined(CONFIG_XEN_NETDEV_FRONTEND_MODULE)) && \
>>> + (defined(CONFIG_XEN_PLATFORM_PCI) || \
>>> + defined(CONFIG_XEN_PLATFORM_PCI_MODULE))
>>> + printk(KERN_INFO "Netfront and the Xen platform PCI driver have "
>>> + "been compiled for this kernel: unplug emulated NICs.\n");
>>> + xen_emul_unplug |= XEN_UNPLUG_ALL_NICS;
>>> +#endif
>>> +#if (defined(CONFIG_XEN_BLKDEV_FRONTEND) || \
>>> + defined(CONFIG_XEN_BLKDEV_FRONTEND_MODULE)) && \
>>> + (defined(CONFIG_XEN_PLATFORM_PCI) || \
>>> + defined(CONFIG_XEN_PLATFORM_PCI_MODULE))
>>> + printk(KERN_INFO "Blkfront and the Xen platform PCI driver have "
>>> + "been compiled for this kernel: unplug emulated disks.\n"
>>> + "You might have to change the root device\n"
>>> + "from /dev/hd[a-d] to /dev/xvd[a-d]\n"
>>> + "in your root= kernel command line option\n");
>>> + xen_emul_unplug |= XEN_UNPLUG_ALL_IDE_DISKS;
>>> +#endif
>>>
>> Wow. Can you move those checks to the header file and make it deal with
>> the #ifdef and setting of xen_emul_unplug?
>>
>>
> I tried, but it didn't improve the elegance of the code, mainly because I
> want to keep the printk in place, so the code would look very much like
> this, but instead of being in platform-pci-unplug.c would be in
> platform_pci.h.
>

What about using Kconfig to define an appropriate symbol and just #ifdef
on that?

>>> + }
>>> + /* Now unplug the emulated devices */
>>> + if (xen_platform_pci_enabled && !(xen_emul_unplug & XEN_UNPLUG_IGNORE))
>>> + outw(xen_emul_unplug, XEN_IOPORT_UNPLUG);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int __init parse_xen_emul_unplug(char *arg)
>>> +{
>>> + char *p, *q;
>>> +
>>> + for (p = arg; p; p = q) {
>>> + q = strchr(arg, ',');
>>> + if (q)
>>> + *q++ = '\0';
>>> + if (!strcmp(p, "all"))
>>> + xen_emul_unplug |= XEN_UNPLUG_ALL;
>>>
>> strncmp..
>>
>>
> is it really needed considering that we know that both strings are NULL
> terminated and one of them is a constant?
>

strncmp would avoid having to modify the string in place.

J


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-06-18 01:39    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans