Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] eni_vdpa: Fix an error handling path in 'eni_vdpa_probe()' | From | Christophe JAILLET <> | Date | Thu, 25 Nov 2021 07:34:02 +0100 |
| |
Le 25/11/2021 à 00:58, Michael S. Tsirkin a écrit : > On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 10:21:44PM +0100, Christophe JAILLET wrote: >> Le 09/11/2021 à 03:54, Jason Wang a écrit : >>> On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 3:32 AM Christophe JAILLET >>> <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >>>> >>>> Le 08/11/2021 à 06:55, Jason Wang a écrit : >>>>> On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 12:15 AM Christophe JAILLET >>>>> <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> In the error handling path, a successful 'vp_legacy_probe()' should be >>>>>> balanced by a corresponding 'vp_legacy_remove()' call, as already done in >>>>>> the remove function. >>>>>> >>>>>> Add the missing call and update gotos accordingly. >>>>>> >>>>>> Fixes: e85087beedca ("eni_vdpa: add vDPA driver for Alibaba ENI") >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/vdpa/alibaba/eni_vdpa.c | 6 ++++-- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/alibaba/eni_vdpa.c b/drivers/vdpa/alibaba/eni_vdpa.c >>>>>> index 3f788794571a..12b3db6b4517 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/vdpa/alibaba/eni_vdpa.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/vdpa/alibaba/eni_vdpa.c >>>>>> @@ -501,7 +501,7 @@ static int eni_vdpa_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id) >>>>>> if (!eni_vdpa->vring) { >>>>>> ret = -ENOMEM; >>>>>> ENI_ERR(pdev, "failed to allocate virtqueues\n"); >>>>>> - goto err; >>>>>> + goto err_remove_vp_legacy; >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> for (i = 0; i < eni_vdpa->queues; i++) { >>>>>> @@ -513,11 +513,13 @@ static int eni_vdpa_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id) >>>>>> ret = vdpa_register_device(&eni_vdpa->vdpa, eni_vdpa->queues); >>>>>> if (ret) { >>>>>> ENI_ERR(pdev, "failed to register to vdpa bus\n"); >>>>>> - goto err; >>>>>> + goto err_remove_vp_legacy; >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> return 0; >>>>>> >>>>>> +err_remove_vp_legacy: >>>>>> + vp_legacy_remove(&eni_vdpa->ldev); >>>>> >>>>> Won't vp_legacy_remove() be triggered by the put_devic() below? >>>> >>>> Hi, I'm sorry but i don't see how. >>>> >>>> My understanding is that: >>>> - on "put_device(&eni_vdpa->vdpa.dev);", the corresponding release >>>> function will be called. >>>> >>>> - This release function is the one recorded in the >>>> '__vdpa_alloc_device()' function. >>>> >>>> - So it should be 'vdpa_release_dev()'. >>>> >>>> - This function, AFAIU, has no knowledge of 'vp_legacy_remove()' or >>>> anything that could call it. >>>> >>>> >>>> Unless I misread something or miss something obvious, I don't see how >>>> 'vp_legacy_remove() would be called. >>>> >>>> >>>> Could you elaborate? >>> >>> I think the device should release the driver (see >>> device_release_driver()) during during its deleting. >> >> Hi, I still don't follow the logic and I don't understand how >> 'vp_legacy_remove()' will finely be called, but it is not that important. >> >> If it's fine for you, it's fine for me :) >> >> CJ > > So pls post just patch 2?
Patch 2/2 should apply cleanly with or without patch 1/2. Do I really need to send a v2 just for dropping the first patch? :/
CJ
> >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>>> >>>> CJ >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> >>>>>> err: >>>>>> put_device(&eni_vdpa->vdpa.dev); >>>>>> return ret; >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 2.30.2 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Virtualization mailing list >>> Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org >>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization >>> > >
| |