In two cases lapic.c does not use the apic_debug macro correctly. This patch
fixes them.
Signed-off-by: Nadav Amit <[email protected]>
---
arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
index 0069118..3855103 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
@@ -1451,7 +1451,7 @@ void kvm_lapic_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
vcpu->arch.apic_arb_prio = 0;
vcpu->arch.apic_attention = 0;
- apic_debug(KERN_INFO "%s: vcpu=%p, id=%d, base_msr="
+ apic_debug("%s: vcpu=%p, id=%d, base_msr="
"0x%016" PRIx64 ", base_address=0x%0lx.\n", __func__,
vcpu, kvm_apic_id(apic),
vcpu->arch.apic_base, apic->base_address);
@@ -1895,7 +1895,7 @@ void kvm_apic_accept_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
/* evaluate pending_events before reading the vector */
smp_rmb();
sipi_vector = apic->sipi_vector;
- pr_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
+ apic_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
vcpu->vcpu_id, sipi_vector);
kvm_vcpu_deliver_sipi_vector(vcpu, sipi_vector);
vcpu->arch.mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE;
--
1.9.1
Nadav Amit <[email protected]> writes:
> In two cases lapic.c does not use the apic_debug macro correctly. This patch
> fixes them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nadav Amit <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> index 0069118..3855103 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
> @@ -1451,7 +1451,7 @@ void kvm_lapic_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> vcpu->arch.apic_arb_prio = 0;
> vcpu->arch.apic_attention = 0;
>
> - apic_debug(KERN_INFO "%s: vcpu=%p, id=%d, base_msr="
> + apic_debug("%s: vcpu=%p, id=%d, base_msr="
> "0x%016" PRIx64 ", base_address=0x%0lx.\n", __func__,
> vcpu, kvm_apic_id(apic),
> vcpu->arch.apic_base, apic->base_address);
> @@ -1895,7 +1895,7 @@ void kvm_apic_accept_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> /* evaluate pending_events before reading the vector */
> smp_rmb();
> sipi_vector = apic->sipi_vector;
> - pr_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
> + apic_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
Why don't we just use pr_debug all throughout ?
> vcpu->vcpu_id, sipi_vector);
> kvm_vcpu_deliver_sipi_vector(vcpu, sipi_vector);
> vcpu->arch.mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE;
On 6/30/14, 3:48 AM, Bandan Das wrote:
> Nadav Amit <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> In two cases lapic.c does not use the apic_debug macro correctly. This patch
>> fixes them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nadav Amit <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>> index 0069118..3855103 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
>> @@ -1451,7 +1451,7 @@ void kvm_lapic_reset(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> vcpu->arch.apic_arb_prio = 0;
>> vcpu->arch.apic_attention = 0;
>>
>> - apic_debug(KERN_INFO "%s: vcpu=%p, id=%d, base_msr="
>> + apic_debug("%s: vcpu=%p, id=%d, base_msr="
>> "0x%016" PRIx64 ", base_address=0x%0lx.\n", __func__,
>> vcpu, kvm_apic_id(apic),
>> vcpu->arch.apic_base, apic->base_address);
>> @@ -1895,7 +1895,7 @@ void kvm_apic_accept_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> /* evaluate pending_events before reading the vector */
>> smp_rmb();
>> sipi_vector = apic->sipi_vector;
>> - pr_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
>> + apic_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
>
> Why don't we just use pr_debug all throughout ?
>
I don't know. I just tried to make it consistent, since it really bugged
me while I was debugging the local-apic.
If you prefer the other way around (which does seem to be better), I can
do the search-and-replace.
Nadav
Il 30/06/2014 03:03, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>>>
>>> sipi_vector = apic->sipi_vector;
>>> - pr_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
>>> + apic_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
>>
>> Why don't we just use pr_debug all throughout ?
>>
> I don't know. I just tried to make it consistent, since it really bugged
> me while I was debugging the local-apic.
> If you prefer the other way around (which does seem to be better), I can
> do the search-and-replace.
vcpu number probably could be moved inside apic_debug, at which point
apic_debug becomes preferrable.
Paolo
Il 30/06/2014 19:39, Bandan Das ha scritto:
> Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Il 30/06/2014 03:03, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>>>>>
>>>>> sipi_vector = apic->sipi_vector;
>>>>> - pr_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
>>>>> + apic_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
>>>>
>>>> Why don't we just use pr_debug all throughout ?
>>>>
>>> I don't know. I just tried to make it consistent, since it really bugged
>>> me while I was debugging the local-apic.
>>> If you prefer the other way around (which does seem to be better), I can
>>> do the search-and-replace.
>>
>> vcpu number probably could be moved inside apic_debug, at which point
>> apic_debug becomes preferrable.
>
> I am not sure, I think all that could be achieved with a file private
> debug define can be done with pr_debug which is generic.
> Nadav didn't introduce apic_debug to this file, so I am
> fine either way.
I am applying the patch, anything else can be done on top.
Paolo
Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> writes:
> Il 30/06/2014 19:39, Bandan Das ha scritto:
>> Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> Il 30/06/2014 03:03, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> sipi_vector = apic->sipi_vector;
>>>>>> - pr_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
>>>>>> + apic_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
>>>>>
>>>>> Why don't we just use pr_debug all throughout ?
>>>>>
>>>> I don't know. I just tried to make it consistent, since it really bugged
>>>> me while I was debugging the local-apic.
>>>> If you prefer the other way around (which does seem to be better), I can
>>>> do the search-and-replace.
>>>
>>> vcpu number probably could be moved inside apic_debug, at which point
>>> apic_debug becomes preferrable.
>>
>> I am not sure, I think all that could be achieved with a file private
>> debug define can be done with pr_debug which is generic.
>> Nadav didn't introduce apic_debug to this file, so I am
>> fine either way.
>
> I am applying the patch, anything else can be done on top.
Sure, it can but it's sure gonna get forgotten since you are
already applying it :)
> Paolo
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> writes:
> Il 30/06/2014 03:03, Nadav Amit ha scritto:
>>>>
>>>> sipi_vector = apic->sipi_vector;
>>>> - pr_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
>>>> + apic_debug("vcpu %d received sipi with vector # %x\n",
>>>
>>> Why don't we just use pr_debug all throughout ?
>>>
>> I don't know. I just tried to make it consistent, since it really bugged
>> me while I was debugging the local-apic.
>> If you prefer the other way around (which does seem to be better), I can
>> do the search-and-replace.
>
> vcpu number probably could be moved inside apic_debug, at which point
> apic_debug becomes preferrable.
I am not sure, I think all that could be achieved with a file private
debug define can be done with pr_debug which is generic.
Nadav didn't introduce apic_debug to this file, so I am
fine either way.
> Paolo
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html