linux-kernel - [PATCH v2 2/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: Consolidate loop conditions in prepare

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20221018040454.405719-3-gshan@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Oct 2022 12:04:50 +0800
From:   Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
To:     kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev
Cc:     kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ajones@...tanamicro.com,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, maz@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org,
        oliver.upton@...ux.dev, mail@...iej.szmigiero.name,
        maciej.szmigiero@...cle.com, seanjc@...gle.com, peterx@...hat.com,
        ricarkol@...gle.com, zhenyzha@...hat.com, shan.gavin@...il.com
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/6] KVM: selftests: memslot_perf_test: Consolidate loop conditions in prepare_vm()

There are two loops in prepare_vm(), which have different conditions.
'slot' is treated as meory slot index in the first loop, but index of
the host virtual address array in the second loop. It makes it a bit
hard to understand the code.

Change the usage of 'slot' in the second loop, to treat it as the
memory slot index either.

No functional change intended.

Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@...hat.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c | 11 +++++------
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
index 231cc8449c2e..dcb492b3f27b 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/kvm/memslot_perf_test.c
@@ -297,21 +297,20 @@ static bool prepare_vm(struct vm_data *data, int nslots, uint64_t *maxslots,
 	}
 	*slot_runtime = timespec_elapsed(tstart);
 
-	for (slot = 0, guest_addr = MEM_GPA; slot < data->nslots; slot++) {
+	for (slot = 1, guest_addr = MEM_GPA; slot <= data->nslots; slot++) {
 		uint64_t npages;
 		uint64_t gpa;
 
 		npages = data->pages_per_slot;
-		if (slot == data->nslots - 1)
+		if (slot == data->nslots)
 			npages += rempages;
 
-		gpa = vm_phy_pages_alloc(data->vm, npages, guest_addr,
-					 slot + 1);
+		gpa = vm_phy_pages_alloc(data->vm, npages, guest_addr, slot);
 		TEST_ASSERT(gpa == guest_addr,
 			    "vm_phy_pages_alloc() failed\n");
 
-		data->hva_slots[slot] = addr_gpa2hva(data->vm, guest_addr);
-		memset(data->hva_slots[slot], 0, npages * 4096);
+		data->hva_slots[slot - 1] = addr_gpa2hva(data->vm, guest_addr);
+		memset(data->hva_slots[slot - 1], 0, npages * 4096);
 
 		guest_addr += npages * 4096;
 	}
-- 
2.23.0