On 2018年11月06日 01:26, John Ferlan wrote:
On 10/22/18 4:01 AM, Wang Huaqiang wrote:
> Introduced virDomainResctrlNew to do the most part of virDomainResctrlAppend
> and move the operation of appending resctrl to @def->resctrls out of
> function.
>
> Rather than rely on virDomainResctrlAppend to perform the allocation, move
> the onus to the caller and make use of virBitmapNewCopy for @vcpus and
> virObjectRef for @alloc, thus removing the need to set each to NULL after the
> call.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Huaqiang <huaqiang.wang(a)intel.com>
> ---
> src/conf/domain_conf.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> index e8e0adc..39bd396 100644
> --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c
> @@ -18920,26 +18920,22 @@ virDomainCachetuneDefParseCache(xmlXPathContextPtr ctxt,
> }
>
>
> -static int
> -virDomainResctrlAppend(virDomainDefPtr def,
> - xmlNodePtr node,
> - virResctrlAllocPtr alloc,
> - virBitmapPtr vcpus,
> - unsigned int flags)
> +static virDomainResctrlDefPtr
> +virDomainResctrlNew(xmlNodePtr node,
> + virResctrlAllocPtr *alloc,
> + virBitmapPtr *vcpus,
Because we're not "stealing" @*alloc and/or @*vcpus, they do not need to
be passed by reference. I can change these. There's some minor merge
impact in later patches too, but no big deal.
Agree. Please help make change.
> + unsigned int flags)
> {
> char *vcpus_str = NULL;
> char *alloc_id = NULL;
> - virDomainResctrlDefPtr tmp_resctrl = NULL;
> - int ret = -1;
> -
> - if (VIR_ALLOC(tmp_resctrl) < 0)
> - goto cleanup;
> + virDomainResctrlDefPtr resctrl = NULL;
> + virDomainResctrlDefPtr ret = NULL;
>
> /* We need to format it back because we need to be consistent in the naming
> * even when users specify some "sub-optimal" string there. */
> - vcpus_str = virBitmapFormat(vcpus);
> + vcpus_str = virBitmapFormat(*vcpus);
> if (!vcpus_str)
> - goto cleanup;
> + return NULL;
>
> if (!(flags & VIR_DOMAIN_DEF_PARSE_INACTIVE))
> alloc_id = virXMLPropString(node, "id");
> @@ -18954,18 +18950,23 @@ virDomainResctrlAppend(virDomainDefPtr def,
> goto cleanup;
> }
>
/* NB: Callers assume new @alloc, need to fill in ID now */
Not that it would prevent someone in the future from passing an @alloc
w/ ->id already filled in and overwriting, but at least for now it's not
the case.
Yes, it might happen.
If @alloc->id is specified through XML and is not following the naming
convention
virAsprintf(&alloc_id, "vcpus_%s", vcpus_str)
If you think it is necessary we might need to through a warning for this
case.
With the changes (that I can make),
Reviewed-by: John Ferlan <jferlan(a)redhat.com>
John
Thanks for review.
Huaqiang
[...]