> On 18 Apr 2024, at 07:28, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> On 09.04.2024 13:45, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/extable.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/extable.c
>> @@ -23,7 +23,8 @@ static inline unsigned long ex_cont(const struct
>> exception_table_entry *x)
>> return EX_FIELD(x, cont);
>> }
>>
On 09.04.2024 13:45, Luca Fancellu wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/extable.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/extable.c
> @@ -23,7 +23,8 @@ static inline unsigned long ex_cont(const struct
> exception_table_entry *x)
> return EX_FIELD(x, cont);
> }
>
> -static int init_or_livepatch cf_check cmp_ex(const
>
> I’ve just spotted an issue with the algorithm, the fix is this one:
>
> diff --git a/xen/common/device_tree.c b/xen/common/device_tree.c
> index 24914a80d03b..262385a041a8 100644
> --- a/xen/common/device_tree.c
> +++ b/xen/common/device_tree.c
> @@ -2360,6 +2360,10 @@ int __init
>
> On 9 Apr 2024, at 12:45, Luca Fancellu wrote:
>
> Introduce a function that given an array of cells containing
> (address,size) intervals, merges the overlapping ones, returning
> an array with no overlapping intervals.
>
> The algorithm needs to sort the intervals by ascending order
>
Introduce a function that given an array of cells containing
(address,size) intervals, merges the overlapping ones, returning
an array with no overlapping intervals.
The algorithm needs to sort the intervals by ascending order
address, so the sort() function already included in the codebase
is
