Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/4] VT-d/qinval: clean up error handling

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 20.06.14 at 04:12, <yang.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jan Beulich wrote on 2014-06-16:
>> - neither qinval_update_qtail() nor qinval_next_index() can fail: make
>>   the former return "void", and drop caller error checks for the latter
>>   (all of which would otherwise return with a spin lock still held)
> 
> I saw lots of other functions are never fail too, e.g., gen_cc_inv_dsc(), 
> gen_iotlb_inv_dsc(), gen_wait_dsc() and others. Any reason only changes the 
> above two and keeps others?

I wanted to leave the gen_* function family aside for the moment, as
they're having more problems than just their return types: Their use
of qinval_lock is completely bogus, as in all cases the callers already
hold iommu->register_lock. The former lock therefore could go away
altogether. And then it becomes rather questionable whether these
single-use functions really need to be separate ones or wouldn't
better be integrated into their callers.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel