Port-xen archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: [PATCH v3 4/7] sysctl: Add sysctl interface for querying PCI topology




On 02/10/2015 09:54 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 10/02/15 14:45, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
On 02/10/2015 06:13 AM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 09/02/15 20:04, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
Signed-off-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky%oracle.com@localhost>
---
   xen/common/sysctl.c         |   73
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
   xen/include/public/sysctl.h |   29 +++++++++++++++++
   2 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/xen/common/sysctl.c b/xen/common/sysctl.c
index 30c5806..ea6557f 100644
--- a/xen/common/sysctl.c
+++ b/xen/common/sysctl.c
@@ -384,7 +384,80 @@ long
do_sysctl(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_sysctl_t) u_sysctl)
           xfree(cputopo);
       }
       break;
+#ifdef HAS_PCI
+    case XEN_SYSCTL_pcitopoinfo:
+    {
+        xen_sysctl_pcitopoinfo_t *ti = &op->u.pcitopoinfo;
+        physdev_pci_device_t *devs;
+        uint8_t *nodes;
+        unsigned int first_dev, i;
+        int num_devs;
+
+        num_devs = ti->num_devs - ti->first_dev;
+
+        if ( guest_handle_is_null(ti->devs) ||
+             guest_handle_is_null(ti->nodes) ||
+             (num_devs <= 0) )
+        {
+            ret = -EINVAL;
+            break;
+        }
+
+        devs = xmalloc_array(physdev_pci_device_t, num_devs);
+        nodes = xmalloc_array(uint8_t, num_devs);
You can do all of this without any memory allocation at all, which will
simplify your error handling substantially.

Something along the lines of

for(...)
{
      copy one physdev_pci_device_t from the guest

      do the lookup

      copy one node id back to the guest
}
I am trying to avoid doing multiple copies. For lots of devices (IIRC,
you said you had a system with a few thousand), having two copies per
loop will add up, I think.
copy_to/from_guest() is not expensive.  It is a straight memcpy with an
extable guards for pagefaults.

True, but still why do this inside a loop? xmalloc() of less than a page is not that expensive, is it?

(The downside is that when we have really lots of devices we may be asking for more than one page. I know that we try not to do this but again, I think the expense would be amortised over long loops.).

-boris


Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index