On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 04:17:30PM +0800, Hu Tao wrote: > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 06:35:42AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 06:24:59AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 10:58:05AM +0800, Hu Tao wrote: > > > > This series includes three patches to fix bugs of memory backend. Patch > > > > 1 prepares for next patches, patch 2 and patch 3 fix two bugs > > > > respectively, see each patch for the bugs and how to reproduce them. > > > > > > > > changes to v1: > > > > > > > > - split patch 1 in v1 into 2 patches > > > > - don't rely on ram_block_add to return -1 > > > > - error message tweak in file_ram_alloc > > > > - add error messages reported by qemu to commit message of patch 3 > > > > > > > > Hu Tao (3): > > > > memory: rename memory_region_init_ram() and > > > > memory_region_init_ram_ptr() > > > > memory: add errp parameter to memory_region_init_ram() and > > > > memory_region_init_ram_ptr() > > > > exec: improve error handling and reporting in file_ram_alloc() and > > > > gethugepagesize() > > > > > > I fixed up some minor issues and applied this, thanks. > > > > And reverted. > > > > Build fails, and a simple check after applying patch 1 gives me: > > git grep memory_region_init_ram |grep -v nofail|wc -l > > 132 > > Thanks for catching this! I should have built all targets. > > > > > Apparently you fixed up about 10% of the files using this function. > > So forget about me merging patch 1. > > > > Add a new > > memory_region_init_ram_may_fail > > and > > memory_region_init_ram_ptr_may_fail > > > > and use it specifically for the new stuff. > > Thanks for the change!
To clarify: I didn't apply this change. I simply reverted the whole patchset. If you want this patchset applied please do it, at this point I'm making no promises on whether it will get into 2.1. > > > > Do the rename on top in two steps: > > memory_region_init_ram -> memory_region_init_ram_nofail > > memory_region_init_ram_may_fail -> memory_region_init_ram > > > > Paolo can then merge it when he prefers, though I'd say 2.2 > > is more reasonable. > > > > > > > > backends/hostmem-ram.c | 2 +- > > > > exec.c | 51 > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------- > > > > hw/block/pflash_cfi01.c | 5 ++++- > > > > hw/block/pflash_cfi02.c | 5 ++++- > > > > hw/core/loader.c | 2 +- > > > > hw/display/vga.c | 2 +- > > > > hw/display/vmware_vga.c | 3 ++- > > > > hw/i386/kvm/pci-assign.c | 9 ++++---- > > > > hw/i386/pc.c | 2 +- > > > > hw/i386/pc_sysfw.c | 4 ++-- > > > > hw/misc/ivshmem.c | 9 ++++---- > > > > hw/misc/vfio.c | 3 ++- > > > > hw/pci/pci.c | 2 +- > > > > include/exec/memory.h | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > > > include/exec/ram_addr.h | 4 ++-- > > > > memory.c | 57 > > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > > > numa.c | 4 ++-- > > > > 17 files changed, 158 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 1.9.3
