[libvirt] [PATCH] test_driver: implement virDomainMemoryPeek

[Ján Tomko]

On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 02:50:27PM +0200, Ilias Stamatis wrote:
>On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 2:39 PM Ján Tomko <jtomko at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 01:37:01PM +0200, Ilias Stamatis wrote:
>> >Begins by writing a @start byte in the first position of @buffer and
>> >then for every next byte it stores the value of its previous one
>> >incremented by one.
>> >
>> >Behaves the same for both supported flags.
>> >
>> >Signed-off-by: Ilias Stamatis <stamatis.iliass at gmail.com>
>> >---
>> >
>> >Initially I thought about checking whether start+size exceeds the
>> >available physical or virtual memory. However I noticed that even when
>> >I pass -1 as @start the qemu driver doesn't complain and it fills the
>> >buffer with data. So I left it as is, without performing any additional
>> >checks.
>> >
>> > src/test/test_driver.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> > 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+)
>> >
>> >diff --git a/src/test/test_driver.c b/src/test/test_driver.c
>> >index a4c17ef0df..04fdf7a4b8 100644
>> >--- a/src/test/test_driver.c
>> >+++ b/src/test/test_driver.c
>> >@@ -6000,6 +6000,42 @@ testDomainManagedSaveRemove(virDomainPtr dom, unsigned int flags)
>> >     return 0;
>> > }
>> >
>> >+static int
>> >+testDomainMemoryPeek(virDomainPtr dom,
>> >+                     unsigned long long start,
>> >+                     size_t size,
>> >+                     void *buffer,
>> >+                     unsigned int flags)
>> >+{
>> >+    int ret = -1;
>> >+    size_t i;
>> >+    unsigned char b = start;
>> >+    virDomainObjPtr vm = NULL;
>> >+
>> >+    virCheckFlags(VIR_MEMORY_VIRTUAL | VIR_MEMORY_PHYSICAL, -1);
>> >+
>>
>> >+    if (flags != VIR_MEMORY_VIRTUAL && flags != VIR_MEMORY_PHYSICAL) {
>> >+        virReportError(VIR_ERR_INVALID_ARG,
>> >+                       "%s", _("flags parameter must be VIR_MEMORY_VIRTUAL or VIR_MEMORY_PHYSICAL"));
>> >+        goto cleanup;
>> >+    }
>>
>> You can use VIR_EXCLUSIVE_FLAGS_RET instead of open-coding it.
>>
>> Jano
>
>We're not checking mutual exclusivity here. We just want to make sure
>that the flags passed matches one of these 2 values (and it is not
>some other random value).
>

Oh right, the macro would miss the case where none of the flags are
present.

>I was a bit hesitant about adding this, but this is exactly how it is
>written in the qemu driver implementation of this function as well.
>
>Is there some other macro for this case?
>

I don't think we need one.

Reviewed-by: Ján Tomko <jtomko at redhat.com>

Jano
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20190527/1966a8b5/attachment-0001.sig>