Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965441AbaKNLQn (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Nov 2014 06:16:43 -0500 Received: from smtp02.citrix.com ([66.165.176.63]:33054 "EHLO SMTP02.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965084AbaKNLQa (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Nov 2014 06:16:30 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,385,1413244800"; d="scan'208";a="192807758" Message-ID: <5465E483.7080802@citrix.com> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 11:16:19 +0000 From: David Vrabel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Juergen Gross , Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk CC: , , , , , , , Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V3 2/8] xen: Delay remapping memory of pv-domain References: <1415684626-18590-1-git-send-email-jgross@suse.com> <1415684626-18590-3-git-send-email-jgross@suse.com> <20141112214506.GA5922@laptop.dumpdata.com> <54644E48.3040506@suse.com> <20141113195605.GA13039@laptop.dumpdata.com> <54658ABF.5050708@suse.com> In-Reply-To: <54658ABF.5050708@suse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DLP: MIA2 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 14/11/14 04:53, Juergen Gross wrote: > > Using BUG() instead would make the code less complex. Do you really > think xen_update_mem_tables() would ever fail in a sane system? > > - set_phys_to_machine() would fail only on a memory shortage. Just > going on without adding more memory wouldn't lead to a healthy system, > I think. > - The hypervisor calls would fail only in case of parameter errors. > This should never happen, so dying seems to be the correct reaction. > > David, what do you think? BUG() sounds fine. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/