lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jul]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v10 6/7] iommu/vt-d: Add set_dev_pasid callback for dma domain
From
On 2023/7/14 11:50, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Baolu Lu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
>> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2023 11:34 AM
>>
>> On 2023/7/13 15:56, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>>>> From: Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2023 12:34 AM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - /*
>>>> - * Should never reach here until we add support for attaching
>>>> - * non-SVA domain to a pasid.
>>>> - */
>>>> - WARN_ON(1);
>>>> + dmar_domain = to_dmar_domain(domain);
>>>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&dmar_domain->lock, flags);
>>>> + list_for_each_entry(curr, &dmar_domain->dev_pasids, link_domain)
>>>> {
>>>> + if (curr->dev == dev && curr->pasid == pasid) {
>>>> + list_del(&curr->link_domain);
>>>> + dev_pasid = curr;
>>>> + break;
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dmar_domain->lock, flags);
>>>>
>>>
>>> what about no matching dev_pasid is find?
>>
>> kfree() can handle this gracefully.
>
> but what about domain_detach_iommu()? Is it correct to adjust
> the refcnting when there is no matching dev_pasid?

You are right.

Logically, if we get a valid domain for a pasid, we should have a
dev_pasid allocated for it. Perhaps, adding a check in the code will
make the code more readable?

Best regards,
baolu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-07-16 20:47    [W:0.045 / U:0.792 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site