Re: [PATCH v1 02/29] virtio-mem: simplify calculation in virtio_mem_mb_state_prepare_next_mb()
From: David Hildenbrand <hidden>
Date: 2020-10-16 09:00:35
Also in:
linux-mm, lkml
On 15.10.20 22:24, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
quoted
We actually need one byte less (next_mb_id is exclusive, first_mb_id is inclusive). Simplify. Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> Cc: Jason Wang <redacted> Cc: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <redacted> --- drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c index a1f5bf7a571a..670b3faf412d 100644 --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c@@ -257,8 +257,8 @@ static enum virtio_mem_mb_state virtio_mem_mb_get_state(struct virtio_mem *vm, */ static int virtio_mem_mb_state_prepare_next_mb(struct virtio_mem *vm) { - unsigned long old_bytes = vm->next_mb_id - vm->first_mb_id + 1; - unsigned long new_bytes = vm->next_mb_id - vm->first_mb_id + 2; + unsigned long old_bytes = vm->next_mb_id - vm->first_mb_id; + unsigned long new_bytes = old_bytes + 1;Maybe we can avoid new_bytes & old_bytes variables, instead use single variable. Can later be used with PFN_UP/PFN_DOWN.
I'll see if it fits into a single line now - if it does, I'll move it there. Thanks! -- Thanks, David / dhildenb _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization