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

["Zhang, Yang Z" <yang.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>]

Jan Beulich wrote on 2014-06-20:
>>>> 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.

I see. 

For this patch:

Acked-by: Yang Zhang <yang.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>


> 
> Jan


Best regards,
Yang



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