On Wed, 2015-07-15 at 14:06 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > find_range() returns NULL when s is below the lowest range, so we have > to use first_range() here (which is as good performance wise).
The bug here was that the first range would be omitted under certain conditions? Saying which here would be interesting. > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@citrix.com> > > --- a/xen/common/rangeset.c > +++ b/xen/common/rangeset.c > @@ -289,7 +289,7 @@ int rangeset_report_ranges( > > read_lock(&r->lock); > > - for ( x = find_range(r, s); x && (x->s <= e) && !rc; x = next_range(r, > x) ) > + for ( x = first_range(r); x && (x->s <= e) && !rc; x = next_range(r, x) ) > if ( x->e >= s ) > rc = cb(max(x->s, s), min(x->e, e), ctxt); > > > > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
