[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v6 3/5] IOMMU: Make the pcidevs_lock a recursive one
>>> On 07.03.16 at 12:42, <quan.xu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On March 07, 2016 7:36pm, <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On 07.03.16 at 12:23, <quan.xu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On March 07, 2016 7:14pm, <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >>> On 07.03.16 at 08:05, <quan.xu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > >> > >> >> > A quick question, is it '-ERESTART', instead of '-EBUSY' ? >> >> >> >> No idea what this question is about in this context. >> >> >> > >> > it is in xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c, assign_device(). >> > >> > static int assign_device() >> > { >> > .... >> > if ( !spin_trylock(&pcidevs_lock) ) >> > return -ERESTART; >> > .... >> > } >> >> But I still don't understand what you're trying to find out or point out. > > Jan, sorry. > Now the return error code is '-ERESTART' for ' if ( > !spin_trylock(&pcidevs_lock) ', in assign_device(), in > xen/drivers/passthrough/pci.c. > I think it would be '-EBUSY'. Oh - definitely not. Just follow the call chain back up, and you should find that this gets taken as an indication to create a continuation, whereas -EBUSY would bubble back up to the original (user space) caller (which is _not_ what we want here). Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |