Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 4/7] xen/9pfs: connect to the backend

[Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> +
> +static int xen_9pfs_front_alloc_dataring(struct xenbus_device *dev,
> +             struct xen_9pfs_dataring *ring)
> +{
> +     int i;
> +     int ret = -ENOMEM;
> +
> +     init_waitqueue_head(&ring->wq);
> +     spin_lock_init(&ring->lock);
> +     INIT_WORK(&ring->work, p9_xen_response);
> +
> +     ring->intf = (struct xen_9pfs_data_intf *) get_zeroed_page(GFP_KERNEL | 
> __GFP_ZERO);
> +     if (!ring->intf)
> +             return ret;
> +     ring->ref = gnttab_grant_foreign_access(dev->otherend_id, 
> virt_to_gfn(ring->intf), 0);
> +     ring->bytes = (void*)__get_free_pages(GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO,
> +                     XEN_9PFS_RING_ORDER - (PAGE_SHIFT - XEN_PAGE_SHIFT));
> +     if (ring->bytes == NULL)
> +             goto out;
> +     for (i = 0; i < (1 << XEN_9PFS_RING_ORDER); i++)
> +             ring->intf->ref[i] = 
> gnttab_grant_foreign_access(dev->otherend_id, virt_to_gfn(ring->bytes) + i, 
> 0);

You need to handle gnttab_grant_foreign_access() returning an error. For
ring->ref too.

(and maybe wrap the line above)

> +     ring->ring.in = ring->bytes;

ring->ring? Maybe 'dataring' for the top-level structure?

BTW, do we really need 'bytes' member? It's always 'ring.in' AFAICT. You
could make it a union with 'ring' (the second 'ring' ;-)) if you want to
keep a pointer to the whole thing as a dedicated name.

-boris


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