[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 7/9] xen/gntdev: Implement dma-buf export functionality
On 06/08/2018 01:30 AM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: On 06/07/2018 04:44 AM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:On 06/07/2018 12:48 AM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:On 06/06/2018 08:10 AM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:On 06/05/2018 01:07 AM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:On 06/01/2018 07:41 AM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote: + +static struct sg_table * +dmabuf_exp_ops_map_dma_buf(struct dma_buf_attachment *attach, + enum dma_data_direction dir) +{ + struct gntdev_dmabuf_attachment *gntdev_dmabuf_attach = attach->priv; + struct gntdev_dmabuf *gntdev_dmabuf = attach->dmabuf->priv; + struct sg_table *sgt; + + pr_debug("Mapping %d pages for dev %p\n", gntdev_dmabuf->nr_pages, + attach->dev); + + if (WARN_ON(dir == DMA_NONE || !gntdev_dmabuf_attach)) WARN_ON_ONCE. Here and elsewhere.Why? The UAPI may be used by different applications, thus we might lose warnings for some of them. Having WARN_ON will show problems for multiple users, not for the first one. Does this make sense to still use WARN_ON?Just as with pr_err call somewhere else the concern here is that userland (which I think is where this is eventually called from?) may intentionally trigger the error, flooding the log. And even this is not directly called from userland there is still a possibility of triggering this error multiple times.Ok, will use WARN_ON_ONCEIn fact, is there a reason to use WARN at all? Does this condition indicate some sort of internal inconsistency/error? Well, the corresponding errors are anyways handled, so I will remove WARN -boris _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |