lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jan]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Fwd: [PATCH v7 1/2] x86: Add Isolated Memory Regions for Quark X1000
On 30/01/15 12:55, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> Oops.
>
> Hit reply not reply-all

On 30/01/15 12:03, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>
> When CONFIG_DEBUGFS=n, you will get error pointer here, which is not
NULL.
>
> So, the proper check is
> if (IS_ERR())
> return PTR_ERR();
> if (!file)
> return -ENOMEM;

Yeah I saw that. Also saw that most other code doesn't bother trapping
those return values - so skipped it.
No issue adding.

>
>> + } else {
>> + reg = i;
>
> Do we go always through all IMRs and choose the last one?
> If no, break is missed here.

Yep - we always choose the last one.


>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + /* Error out if we have no free IMR entries. */
>> + if (reg == -1) {
>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>
> -ENOMEM ? Like you said there is no *free* IMR.

OK

>> + * imr_remove_range(0, size, base); delete IMR at index 0 base/size
ignored.
>> + * imr_remove_range(-1, base, size); delete IMR from base to base+size.
>
> (size, base) or (base, size) ?

base, size that's a documentation typo :)

>> +
>> + ret = imr_check_params(base, size);
>> + if (ret == -EINVAL || (ret == -ENOMEM && reg == -1))
>
> reg base size (0 correct, 1 wrong):
>
> 0 0 0 — which should be used? what is the priority?
> 0 x 1 — index
> 0 1 x — index
> 1 0 0 — address
> 1 0 1 — an error
> 1 1 1 — an error
>
> Thus, could it be simpler? Like
> if (reg < 0 && ret) ?

ret will be EINVAL for unaligned base or size
ret will be ENOMEM when reg == -1 and size == 0

I could probably write it like this to make it clearer
(ret == -EINVAL || (reg == -1 && size == 0)
return -EINVAL;

traps unaligned input - for address range tear-down
traps zero sized - for address range tear-down

Allows index based teardown i.e. reg >= 0

> if (ret)
>
>> + pr_warn("debugfs register failed!\n");
>
> Do we actually need this? Or move it to debug level.

It was your suggestion @ a previous review ....

> Here is the mix of kernel levels. What about to align them?
>
> For example I doubt we need to distinguish messages by level:
>
> pr_info();
> vprintk(KERN_INFO fmt, …);

OK fine.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-01-30 14:21    [W:0.123 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site