[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] PCI: avoid bogus calls to get_pseg()
- To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Rahul Singh <Rahul.Singh@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2022 09:26:13 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US
- Arc-authentication-results: i=2; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=temperror (sender ip is 63.35.35.123) smtp.rcpttodomain=lists.xenproject.org smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dmarc=temperror action=none header.from=arm.com; dkim=pass (signature was verified) header.d=armh.onmicrosoft.com; arc=pass (0 oda=1 ltdi=1 spf=[1,1,smtp.mailfrom=arm.com] dkim=[1,1,header.d=arm.com] dmarc=[1,1,header.from=arm.com])
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=arm.com; dkim=pass header.d=arm.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=1vSIq1vrAL7EGGbL0y+nQGmTt2tz5PDTqBIvbVI6CGw=; b=UiaYwVKL9beiHzCgrPE7To0ncQ3n4TZxOLRnBc6Jg4/+gOjZIBbQFcSMj8gVZH+dj43zyX7W6s4Sn8bVjaomWnuIxN16juv9PingvEr59iqVYzRFJXHVoltGOqJPXSEMwjchdgDK+zZCErWr0NPNzze3jwqo57Rm3KIq/wL3MN75QeiT5W0qqxUEXxLsm8ZMiHqsrFuPFM70v6UOcByO9VrJ3Pj1LJP7WDXkZOz+X5eGLbZPifZdqCIEU4zDtQJr+kspXuan88HM3/udUL0DxGcCBOzr+faE+/Jez+TLXDX8I7uWSfEX3SXUVS5Baxo+RnQSJ+psbgSicG8zaybBZg==
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=1vSIq1vrAL7EGGbL0y+nQGmTt2tz5PDTqBIvbVI6CGw=; b=ZDIz9ZAmB5Pzu5Uanv3ydlSRaSSFrT48SmRSteT/4SspNOfuYFsMYCY8T+DQvBZoizYC+EKcKHNPCsxsS4w28w4QMjgQLBtw2Sjw2Lt0dI3Df2p3j2pMXsLFXIL8sdFa+OjoqwASj4fl3+J0fzgWF5P6AMvmefoLgeVBzuXVeXC5BfH3BTkix27UZgRvbzjW2K/8iwU8d18QLhDk4aX0oqTXLzi3sYfLp8iwkF7ilf5Tu9nSHxLHgxSGzG1ybDjC4mvslg4Zbx/1mS+mx/01+J2HNMFvxv4e7Ul9IDZ1LngnRM1rNHFzXrPf6rIHQX02rZLgpx/zQ1HbGdmcb/u3Bw==
- Arc-seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=pass; b=RfRqyAEEp8fhnzwpQ6nOrRg7yeNQR+MSIOIWigxb7t2PCkjYRhdpz6D2fnK6XhM5xZxRJ4awxZMFbOU5B7463W34qbUCLrFhHUT77JvekKkPb5MmbMLsDO/UyrsxQdRuM/sN14o6NlyGSFVNxhifLMtlWQ4EJ5pt0wxf/I3lbYzVzM6v7shswc0gSjhP26FPT4FfmVeP8UA8IISgQCXJ2j7bNVsBNuk3bBJ6dULPmxQYvrM2WPFJIah3Vl9OEhjtjMEVJFZ1G9F1AybFeR1OwqNBRcNtvtLjawsyeLY38Cw1BhYa9AR4H2PpYq9thZuxh7XVeOMr2tjIlWf1X474vQ==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=VEunBA0sOLudKBmUqRLPBhyBWMvWJkUXe3HJ60Gn2gZYz26rPoJTDG1WjzekUEzO+Lfa71GBXqGNO4FDLu7X0aCzOGijdlU9rSfCH1MUAWkT7q8MNYSRpHcbajVPzpE8sL9aG54yEdReNPMc8LCJfTmBSvsuq5lSs+8JkTwsrbRncz1Z4YF1I1hjtNyUEV9Bi8+xXYseiC1qK2yMEklNigvEk7XUKOA0cI16X3vW9A8efFcBcmVoFtc8jOj1ERRQ7FCviK+qF0I+Uojd7VvTmZlEdflTFd85LaoFH1x+moUO8Ky64rUMYzeo3VBK7dk6sMe0BtRCOnce6cPrjIhgzQ==
- Authentication-results-original: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Paul Durrant <paul@xxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 11 Aug 2022 09:26:45 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
- Nodisclaimer: true
- Original-authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=arm.com;
- Thread-index: AQHYrAfaSCwnUxIuckmqYlBEjhSF8a2oDQUAgAE7iwCAACgsgA==
- Thread-topic: [PATCH] PCI: avoid bogus calls to get_pseg()
Hi Jan,
> On 11 Aug 2022, at 8:02 am, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 10.08.2022 14:13, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 09/08/2022 16:50, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> When passed -1, the function (taking a u16) will look for segment
>>> 0xffff, which might exist. If it exists, we may find (return) the wrong
>>> device.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> An alternative would be to declare that both functions cannot be called
>>> with "wildcards" anymore. The last such use went away with f591755823a7
>>> ("IOMMU/PCI: don't let domain cleanup continue when device de-assignment
>>> failed") afaict.
>>
>> The way wildcards were used before were always bogus IMO.
>>
>> I suggest we take this opportunity to remove the ability to re-introduce
>> that anti-pattern.
>
> Okay, will do that in v2. Rahul - this means there's no point anymore
> sending a v2 of your fix, as the bug will disappear as a side effect.
> I'll add you as the reporter of that bug.
Ok. I will test the patch once you sent it..
Regards,
Rahul
|
