Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 1/2] xen/pt: Unlock d->event_lock on error paths

[Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 06:47:52PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Introduced by c/s fba00494268 "x86/pt: enable binding of GSIs to a PVH Dom0"
> 
> Spotted by Coverity.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks!

Reivwed-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>

None of those paths should be used in any case.

> ---
> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  xen/drivers/passthrough/io.c | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/io.c b/xen/drivers/passthrough/io.c
> index 2fdbba6..25e3fb4 100644
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/io.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/io.c
> @@ -490,7 +490,11 @@ int pt_irq_create_bind(
>              /* MSI_TRANSLATE is not supported for the hardware domain. */
>              if ( pt_irq_bind->irq_type != PT_IRQ_TYPE_PCI ||
>                   pirq >= hvm_domain_irq(d)->nr_gsis )
> +            {
> +                spin_unlock(&d->event_lock);
> +
>
>                  return -EINVAL;
> +            }
>              guest_gsi = pirq;
>          }
>  
> @@ -523,6 +527,8 @@ int pt_irq_create_bind(
>  
>                      if ( mask < 0 || trigger_mode < 0 )
>                      {
> +                        spin_unlock(&d->event_lock);
> +
>                          ASSERT_UNREACHABLE();
>                          return -EINVAL;

You seem to have added extra newlines between the unlock and the
return, is this intentional? I'm asking because it's not done in the
other error paths.

Roger.

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