Hi,
On 21/04/2022 16:17, Paran Lee wrote:
It doesn't seem necessary to do that calculation of order shift again.
I think we need to weight that against increasing the number of local
variables that do pretty much the same.
This is pretty much done to a matter of taste here. IMHO, the original
version is better but I see Stefano reviewed it so I will not argue
against it.
That said, given you already sent a few patches, can you explain why you
are doing this? Is this optimization purpose? Is it clean-up?
Signed-off-by: Paran Lee <p4ran...@gmail.com>
---
xen/arch/arm/p2m.c | 9 +++++----
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c b/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c
index 1d1059f7d2..533afc830a 100644
--- a/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/p2m.c
@@ -1092,7 +1092,7 @@ int p2m_set_entry(struct p2m_domain *p2m,
while ( nr )
{
unsigned long mask;
- unsigned long order;
+ unsigned long order, pages;
/*
* Don't take into account the MFN when removing mapping (i.e
@@ -1118,11 +1118,12 @@ int p2m_set_entry(struct p2m_domain *p2m,
if ( rc )
break;
- sgfn = gfn_add(sgfn, (1 << order));
+ pages = 1 << order;
Please take the opportunity to switch to 1UL.
+ sgfn = gfn_add(sgfn, pages);
if ( !mfn_eq(smfn, INVALID_MFN) )
- smfn = mfn_add(smfn, (1 << order));
+ smfn = mfn_add(smfn, pages);
- nr -= (1 << order);
+ nr -= pages;
}
return rc;
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
