lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Oct]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] virtio_ring: add an error code check in virtqueue_resize
From
On 2023/10/23 13:46, Xuan Zhuo wrote:
>>>>>>>> Well, what are the cases where it can happen practically?
>>>>>>> Device error. Such as vp_active_vq()
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>> Hmm interesting. OK. But do callers know to recover?
>>>>> No.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I think WARN + broken is suitable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>> Sorry for the late, is the following code okay?
>>>>
>>>> @@ -2739,7 +2739,7 @@ int virtqueue_resize(struct virtqueue *_vq, u32 num,
>>>> void (*recycle)(struct virtqueue *vq, void *buf))
>>>> {
>>>> struct vring_virtqueue *vq = to_vvq(_vq);
>>>> - int err;
>>>> + int err, err_reset;
>>>>
>>>> if (num > vq->vq.num_max)
>>>> return -E2BIG;
>>>> @@ -2759,7 +2759,15 @@ int virtqueue_resize(struct virtqueue *_vq, u32 num,
>>>> else
>>>> err = virtqueue_resize_split(_vq, num);
>>>>
>>>> - return virtqueue_enable_after_reset(_vq);
>>>> + err_reset = virtqueue_enable_after_reset(_vq);
>>>> +
>>>> + if (err) {
>>> No err.
>>>
>>> err is not important.
>>> You can remove that.
>> Emm, I'm a little confused that which code should I remove ?
>>
>>
>> like this:
>> if (vq->packed_ring)
>> virtqueue_resize_packed(_vq, num);
>> else
>> virtqueue_resize_split(_vq, num);
>>
>> And we should set broken and warn inside virtqueue_enable_after_reset()?

In my opinion, we should return the error code of virtqueue_resize_packed() / virtqueue_resize_split().
But if this err is not important, this patch makes no sense.
Maybe I misunderstand somewhere...
If you think it's worth sending a patch, you can send it :).(I'm not familiar with this code).

Thanks,
Su Hui

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-10-23 11:51    [W:0.093 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site