[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] xen: events: free irqs in error condition
On Mi, 2018-02-28 at 08:16 +0000, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 05:32:53PM +0000, Shah, Amit wrote: > > > > > > On Di, 2018-02-27 at 17:07 +0000, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 03:55:58PM +0000, Amit Shah wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > In case of errors in irq setup for MSI, free up the allocated > > > > irqs. > > > > > > > > Fixes: 4892c9b4ada9f9 ("xen: add support for MSI message > > > > groups") > > > > Reported-by: Hooman Mirhadi <mirhadih@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > CC: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > CC: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > CC: Eduardo Valentin <eduval@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > CC: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx> > > > > CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > CC: "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > CC: Liu Shuo <shuo.a.liu@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > CC: Anoob Soman <anoob.soman@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Amit Shah <aams@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/xen/events/events_base.c | 5 ++++- > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/xen/events/events_base.c > > > > b/drivers/xen/events/events_base.c > > > > index c86d10e..a299586 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/xen/events/events_base.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/xen/events/events_base.c > > > > @@ -750,11 +750,14 @@ int xen_bind_pirq_msi_to_irq(struct > > > > pci_dev > > > > *dev, struct msi_desc *msidesc, > > > > > > > > ret = irq_set_msi_desc(irq, msidesc); > > > > if (ret < 0) > > > > - goto error_irq; > > > > + goto error_desc; > > > > out: > > > > mutex_unlock(&irq_mapping_update_lock); > > > > return irq; > > > > error_irq: > > > > + while (--nvec >= i) > > > > + xen_free_irq(irq + nvec); > > > > +error_desc: > > > > while (i > 0) { > > > > i--; > > > > __unbind_from_irq(irq + i); > > > It seems pointless to introduce another label and another loop to > > > fix > > > something that can be fixed with a single label and a single > > > loop, > > > this just makes the code more complex for no reason. > > I disagree, just because there are two different cleanups to be > > made > > for two different issues; it's not as if the if.. and else > > conditions > > are going to be interleaved. > Oh, I don't mind so much whether it ends up being two patches or a > single one, but IMHO the code should end up looking similar to what I > proposed, I would like to avoid having two loops and two labels. > > Could you rework the series so that the end result uses a single loop > (and label)? That was the part I didn't like much, so it would be better if the patch came from you :) Amit Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH Berlin - Dresden - Aachen main office: Krausenstr. 38, 10117 Berlin Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Ralf Herbrich, Christian Schlaeger Ust-ID: DE289237879 Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 149173 B _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |