WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] RE: [Xen-changelog] [xen-unstable]vt-d: Fixpanic in msi_

To: Dexuan Cui <dexuan.cui@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] RE: [Xen-changelog] [xen-unstable]vt-d: Fixpanic in msi_msg_read_remap_rte with acpi=off
From: Miroslav Rezanina <mrezanin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 05:09:55 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 02:10:19 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1689390489.362811255943106271.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
----- "Dexuan Cui" <dexuan.cui@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: "Dexuan Cui" <dexuan.cui@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Miroslav Rezanina" <mrezanin@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Keir@xxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Fraser" 
> <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 10:49:35 AM GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin / 
> Bern / Rome / Stockholm / Vienna
> Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] RE: [Xen-changelog] [xen-unstable]vt-d: Fixpanic in 
> msi_msg_read_remap_rte with acpi=off
>
> Miroslav Rezanina wrote:
> > Hi Dexuan,
> > you're right. We should print warning. In your patch, I do not
> > understand 
> > why you put comment only in setup_dom0_devices function. There is
> more
> > calling of domain_context_mapping and we check NULL also in
> In other places, the retuen value of domain_context_mapping() has been
> checked properly, e.g., passing to the caller, so we wouldn't ignore
> the failure. :-)
> 
> > domain_context_unmap and reassign_device_ownership. We should put
> > warning in there too, shouldn't we? 
> domain_context_unmap() is invoked in 2 places:
> 1) in intel_iommu_remove_device(), the return value has been
> propagated properly;
> 2) in reassign_device_ownership(), invoking reassign_device_ownership
> implies the device has been successfully assigned and the
> domain_context_mapping() returned success, so here the
> domain_context_unmap() can't fail.
> 
> The other returing place in reassign_device_ownership()  has been
> propagated properly to the caller.
> 
> Thanks,
> -- Dexuan
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Ok, I understand. I just need to clarify this. Your v2 is all right.
-- 
Miroslav Rezanina
Software Engineer - Virtualization Team - XEN kernel


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>