Sorry, I've failed to add Julien in my previous reply.

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 11:13:50AM +0200, Roger Pau Monn� wrote:

Adding Julien how did the work to support XEN_PAGE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE.

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 02:14:26AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

On 12.09.18 at 07:45, [off-list ref] wrote:

--- a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h
+++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h

@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@
 	(XEN_PAGES_PER_INDIRECT_FRAME / XEN_PAGES_PER_SEGMENT)
 
 #define MAX_INDIRECT_PAGES \
-	((MAX_INDIRECT_SEGMENTS + SEGS_PER_INDIRECT_FRAME - 1)/SEGS_PER_INDIRECT_FRAME)
+		DIV_ROUND_UP(MAX_INDIRECT_SEGMENTS, SEGS_PER_INDIRECT_FRAME)
 #define INDIRECT_PAGES(_segs) DIV_ROUND_UP(_segs, XEN_PAGES_PER_INDIRECT_FRAME)

My first reaction was to suggest

#define MAX_INDIRECT_PAGES INDIRECT_PAGES(MAX_INDIRECT_SEGMENTS)

but that wouldn't match what's there currently (note the two different
divisors). I can't really decide whether that's just unfortunate naming
of the two macros, or an actual bug.

I think there's indeed a bug here.

AFAICT, MAX_INDIRECT_PAGES should use XEN_PAGES_PER_INDIRECT_FRAME and
then it could be changed as Jan suggested.

Current MAX_INDIRECT_PAGES is misnamed and should instead be
MAX_INDIRECT_SEGS (which on x86 is exactly the same because PAGE_SIZE
== XEN_PAGE_SIZE).

Roger.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel