[2/2] VT-d: adjust logging of RMRRs
diff mbox series

Message ID e77ce9c5-455a-56c4-32b2-01d73dea33c1@suse.com
State New
Headers show
Series
  • VT-d: RMRR parsing adjustments
Related show

Commit Message

Jan Beulich Feb. 6, 2020, 1:31 p.m. UTC
Consistently use [,] range representation, shrink leading double blanks
to a single one, and slightly adjust text in some cases.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

Comments

Jason Andryuk Feb. 6, 2020, 6:46 p.m. UTC | #1
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 8:33 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
> Consistently use [,] range representation, shrink leading double blanks
> to a single one, and slightly adjust text in some cases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c
> @@ -561,7 +561,7 @@ static int register_one_rmrr(struct acpi
>          {
>              dprintk(XENLOG_WARNING VTDPREFIX,
>                      " Non-existent device (%04x:%02x:%02x.%u) is reported"
> -                    " in RMRR (%"PRIx64", %"PRIx64")'s scope!\n",
> +                    " in RMRR [%"PRIx64",%"PRIx64")]'s scope!\n",

Missed removing the ")".

With that fixed, Reviewed-by: Jason Andryuk <jandryuk@gmail.com>

Regards,
Jason
Jan Beulich Feb. 7, 2020, 7:59 a.m. UTC | #2
On 06.02.2020 19:46, Jason Andryuk wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 8:33 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>
>> Consistently use [,] range representation, shrink leading double blanks
>> to a single one, and slightly adjust text in some cases.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>>
>> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c
>> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c
>> @@ -561,7 +561,7 @@ static int register_one_rmrr(struct acpi
>>          {
>>              dprintk(XENLOG_WARNING VTDPREFIX,
>>                      " Non-existent device (%04x:%02x:%02x.%u) is reported"
>> -                    " in RMRR (%"PRIx64", %"PRIx64")'s scope!\n",
>> +                    " in RMRR [%"PRIx64",%"PRIx64")]'s scope!\n",
> 
> Missed removing the ")".
> 
> With that fixed, Reviewed-by: Jason Andryuk <jandryuk@gmail.com>

Oh, indeed - thanks for noticing!

Jan
Tian, Kevin Feb. 18, 2020, 5:24 a.m. UTC | #3
> From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2020 9:31 PM
> To: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
> Cc: Tian, Kevin <kevin.tian@intel.com>
> Subject: [PATCH 2/2] VT-d: adjust logging of RMRRs
> 
> Consistently use [,] range representation, shrink leading double blanks
> to a single one, and slightly adjust text in some cases.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>

Patch
diff mbox series

--- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c
+++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/dmar.c
@@ -561,7 +561,7 @@  static int register_one_rmrr(struct acpi
         {
             dprintk(XENLOG_WARNING VTDPREFIX,
                     " Non-existent device (%04x:%02x:%02x.%u) is reported"
-                    " in RMRR (%"PRIx64", %"PRIx64")'s scope!\n",
+                    " in RMRR [%"PRIx64",%"PRIx64")]'s scope!\n",
                     rmrru->segment, b, d, f,
                     rmrru->base_address, rmrru->end_address);
             ignore = true;
@@ -577,8 +577,8 @@  static int register_one_rmrr(struct acpi
     if ( ignore )
     {
         dprintk(XENLOG_WARNING VTDPREFIX,
-                "  Ignore the RMRR (%"PRIx64", %"PRIx64") due to "
-                "devices under its scope are not PCI discoverable!\n",
+                " Ignore RMRR [%"PRIx64",%"PRIx64"] as no device"
+                " under its scope is PCI discoverable!\n",
                 rmrru->base_address, rmrru->end_address);
         scope_devices_free(&rmrru->scope);
         xfree(rmrru);
@@ -586,7 +586,7 @@  static int register_one_rmrr(struct acpi
     else if ( rmrru->base_address > rmrru->end_address )
     {
         dprintk(XENLOG_WARNING VTDPREFIX,
-                "  The RMRR (%"PRIx64", %"PRIx64") is incorrect!\n",
+                " RMRR [%"PRIx64",%"PRIx64"] is incorrect!\n",
                 rmrru->base_address, rmrru->end_address);
         scope_devices_free(&rmrru->scope);
         xfree(rmrru);
@@ -595,8 +595,7 @@  static int register_one_rmrr(struct acpi
     else
     {
         if ( iommu_verbose )
-            dprintk(VTDPREFIX,
-                    "  RMRR region: base_addr %"PRIx64" end_addr %"PRIx64"\n",
+            dprintk(VTDPREFIX, " RMRR: [%"PRIx64",%"PRIx64"]\n",
                     rmrru->base_address, rmrru->end_address);
         acpi_register_rmrr_unit(rmrru);
     }
@@ -635,7 +634,7 @@  acpi_parse_one_rmrr(struct acpi_dmar_hea
      */
     if ( !e820_all_mapped(base_addr, end_addr + 1, RAM_TYPE_RESERVED) )
         printk(XENLOG_WARNING VTDPREFIX
-               "  RMRR address range %"PRIx64"..%"PRIx64" not in reserved memory;"
+               " RMRR [%"PRIx64",%"PRIx64"] not in reserved memory;"
                " need \"iommu_inclusive_mapping=1\"?\n",
                 base_addr, end_addr);