Skip to content

Clean up resource alloc#5892

Open
ShadowCurse wants to merge 3 commits into
firecracker-microvm:mainfrom
ShadowCurse:clean_up_resource_alloc
Open

Clean up resource alloc#5892
ShadowCurse wants to merge 3 commits into
firecracker-microvm:mainfrom
ShadowCurse:clean_up_resource_alloc

Conversation

@ShadowCurse
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Changes

Remove some redundant functions from ResourceAllocator since most of the code accesses it's members directly anyway.

Reason

Less code

License Acceptance

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. For more information on following Developer
Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check
CONTRIBUTING.md.

PR Checklist

  • I have read and understand CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • I have run tools/devtool checkbuild --all to verify that the PR passes
    build checks on all supported architectures.
  • I have run tools/devtool checkstyle to verify that the PR passes the
    automated style checks.
  • I have described what is done in these changes, why they are needed, and
    how they are solving the problem in a clear and encompassing way.
  • I have updated any relevant documentation (both in code and in the docs)
    in the PR.
  • I have mentioned all user-facing changes in CHANGELOG.md.
  • If a specific issue led to this PR, this PR closes the issue.
  • When making API changes, I have followed the
    Runbook for Firecracker API changes.
  • I have tested all new and changed functionalities in unit tests and/or
    integration tests.
  • I have linked an issue to every new TODO.

  • This functionality cannot be added in rust-vmm.

@ShadowCurse ShadowCurse self-assigned this May 15, 2026
@ShadowCurse ShadowCurse force-pushed the clean_up_resource_alloc branch from 6853802 to 30031eb Compare May 15, 2026 16:59
This wrapper was used only once in the code and it generally does not
follow the patter of using underlying allocators directly like the rest
of the code does.

The alternative to removing this is to do a exact opposite and find all
places where allocators are used directly and make them use wrappers.
This will not provide any benefits since wrappers have no logic in them
and will only increase the line count and indirection overhead.

Signed-off-by: Egor Lazarchuk <yegorlz@amazon.co.uk>
Following same logic from previous commit, remove this wrapper as well.

Signed-off-by: Egor Lazarchuk <yegorlz@amazon.co.uk>
Following same logic from previous commit, remove this wrapper as well.

Signed-off-by: Egor Lazarchuk <yegorlz@amazon.co.uk>
@ShadowCurse ShadowCurse force-pushed the clean_up_resource_alloc branch from 30031eb to 8eb5186 Compare May 15, 2026 16:59
@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov Bot commented May 15, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 95.83333% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 82.89%. Comparing base (9b53e62) to head (8eb5186).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/vmm/src/device_manager/mmio.rs 75.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5892      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   82.90%   82.89%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         277      277              
  Lines       30053    30029      -24     
==========================================
- Hits        24914    24892      -22     
+ Misses       5139     5137       -2     
Flag Coverage Δ
5.10-m5n.metal 83.19% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m6a.metal 82.53% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m6g.metal 79.82% <93.75%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
5.10-m6i.metal ?
5.10-m7a.metal-48xl 82.52% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m7g.metal 79.82% <93.75%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
5.10-m7i.metal-24xl 83.16% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m7i.metal-48xl 83.16% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m8g.metal-24xl 79.82% <93.75%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
5.10-m8g.metal-48xl 79.82% <93.75%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
5.10-m8i.metal-48xl 83.16% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m8i.metal-96xl 83.16% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m5n.metal 83.22% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m6a.metal 82.56% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m6g.metal 79.82% <93.75%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
6.1-m6i.metal 83.21% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m7a.metal-48xl 82.54% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m7g.metal 79.82% <93.75%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
6.1-m7i.metal-24xl 83.22% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m7i.metal-48xl 83.22% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m8g.metal-24xl 79.82% <93.75%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
6.1-m8g.metal-48xl 79.82% <93.75%> (-0.02%) ⬇️
6.1-m8i.metal-48xl 83.23% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m8i.metal-96xl 83.23% <95.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant