"Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilb...@redhat.com> wrote: > * Juan Quintela (quint...@redhat.com) wrote: >> We use an unsigned long for the page number. Notice that our bitmaps >> already got that for the index, so we have that limit. >> >> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> >> --- >> migration/ram.c | 76 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------- >> 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 42 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/migration/ram.c b/migration/ram.c >> index 6cd77b5..b1a031e 100644 >> --- a/migration/ram.c >> +++ b/migration/ram.c >> @@ -611,13 +611,12 @@ static int save_xbzrle_page(RAMState *rs, uint8_t >> **current_data, >> * @rs: current RAM state >> * @rb: RAMBlock where to search for dirty pages >> * @start: starting address (typically so we can continue from previous >> page) >> - * @ram_addr_abs: pointer into which to store the address of the dirty page >> - * within the global ram_addr space >> + * @page: pointer into where to store the dirty page > > I'd prefer if you could call it 'page_abs' - it often gets tricky to know > whether we're talking about a page offset within a RAMBlock or an > offset within > the whole bitmap.
I don't really care. Changed. > (I wish we had different index types) This is C man!! >> - trace_get_queued_page(block->idstr, >> - (uint64_t)offset, >> - (uint64_t)*ram_addr_abs); >> + trace_get_queued_page(block->idstr, (uint64_t)offset, >> + *page); > > I think you need to fix the trace_ definitions for get_queued_page > and get_queued_page_not_dirty they're currently taking uint64_t's for > ram_addr and they now need to be long's (with the format changes). Done. Thanks, Juan.
