This was caught by the nightly compiler during cargo fuzz build.
error: lifetime flowing from input to output with different syntax can be confusing
--> /home/runner/work/cloud-hypervisor/cloud-hypervisor/hypervisor/src/arch/x86/emulator/mod.rs:493:26
|
493 | pub fn new(platform: &mut dyn PlatformEmulator<CpuState = T>) -> Emulator<T> {
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ----------- the lifetime gets resolved as `'_`
| |
| this lifetime flows to the output
|
= note: `-D mismatched-lifetime-syntaxes` implied by `-D warnings`
= help: to override `-D warnings` add `#[allow(mismatched_lifetime_syntaxes)]`
help: one option is to remove the lifetime for references and use the anonymous lifetime for paths
|
493 | pub fn new(platform: &mut dyn PlatformEmulator<CpuState = T>) -> Emulator<'_, T> {
Signed-off-by: Jinank Jain <jinankjain@microsoft.com>
Historically the Cloud Hypervisor coding style has been to ensure that
all imports are ordered and placed in a single group. Unfortunately
cargo fmt has no support for ensuring that all imports are in a single
group so if whitespace lines were added as part of the import statements
then they would only be odered correctly in the group.
By adopting "group_imports="StdExternalCrate" we can enforce a style
where imports are placed in at most three groups for std, external
crates and the crate itself. Choosing a style enforceable by the tooling
reduces the reviewer burden.
Signed-off-by: Rob Bradford <rbradford@rivosinc.com>
warning: assigning the result of `Clone::clone()` may be inefficient
--> vmm/src/device_manager.rs:4188:17
|
4188 | id = child_id.clone();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: use `clone_from()`: `id.clone_from(child_id)`
|
= help: for further information visit https://rust-lang.github.io/rust-clippy/master/index.html#assigning_clones
= note: `#[warn(clippy::assigning_clones)]` on by default
Signed-off-by: Rob Bradford <rbradford@rivosinc.com>
The current implementation of breadth first traversal for device tree
uses a temporary vector, therefore causes unnecessary memory copy.
Remove it and do it within vector nodes.
Signed-off-by: Hao Xu <howeyxu@tencent.com>
There is no need to include serde_derive separately,
as it can be specified as serde feature instead.
Signed-off-by: Maksym Pavlenko <pavlenko.maksym@gmail.com>
By having the DeviceNode storing a PciBdf, we simplify the internal code
as well as allow for custom Serialize/Deserialize implementation for the
PciBdf structure. These custom implementations let us display the PCI
s/b/d/f in a human readable format.
Fixes#3711
Signed-off-by: Sebastien Boeuf <sebastien.boeuf@intel.com>
This crate was used in the integration tests to allow the tests to
continue and clean up after a failure. This isn't necessary in the unit
tests and adds a large build dependency chain including an unmaintained
crate.
Signed-off-by: Rob Bradford <robert.bradford@intel.com>
With the segment id now encoded in the bdf it is not necessary to have
the separate field for it.
Signed-off-by: Rob Bradford <robert.bradford@intel.com>
Replace the hardcoded zero PCI segment id when adding devices to the bus
and extend the DeviceTree to hold the PCI segment id.
Signed-off-by: Rob Bradford <robert.bradford@intel.com>
Extend and use the existing DeviceTree to retrieve useful information
related to PCI devices. This removes the duplication with pci_devices
field which was internal to the DeviceManager.
Signed-off-by: Sebastien Boeuf <sebastien.boeuf@intel.com>
Instead of relying on a PCI specific device list, we use the DeviceTree
as a reference to determine if a device name is already in use or not.
Signed-off-by: Sebastien Boeuf <sebastien.boeuf@intel.com>
Its test case calls remove unconditionally. Instead of making the test
code call remove conditionally, removing the pci_support dependency
simplifies things -- that function is just a wrapper around HashMap's
remove function anyway.
Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <liuwe@microsoft.com>
We need a way to store the information about where a PCI device was
placed on the PCI bus before the VM was snapshotted. The way to do this
is by adding an extra field to the DeviceNode structure.
Signed-off-by: Sebastien Boeuf <sebastien.boeuf@intel.com>
This module will be dedicated to DeviceNode and DeviceTree definitions
along with some dedicated unit tests.
Signed-off-by: Sebastien Boeuf <sebastien.boeuf@intel.com>
