From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, avi@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [KVM PATCH v9 1/2] KVM: make io_bus interface more robust
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 14:20:35 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090707112035.GB3647@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090706203315.14222.25490.stgit@dev.haskins.net>
Looks good to me. One thing that's kind of ugly is the cleanup in i8254,
see below. And a couple of other style comments.
On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 04:33:15PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> Today kvm_io_bus_regsiter_dev() returns void and will internally BUG_ON
> if it fails. We want to create dynamic MMIO/PIO entries driven from
> userspace later in the series, so we need to enhance the code to be more
> robust with the following changes:
>
> 1) Add a return value to the registration function
> 2) Fix up all the callsites to check the return code, handle any
> failures, and percolate the error up to the caller.
> 3) Add an unregister function that collapses holes in the array
>
> Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
> ---
>
> arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++--
> arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c | 9 ++++++++-
> include/linux/kvm_host.h | 10 +++++++---
> virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c | 8 ++++++--
> virt/kvm/ioapic.c | 8 ++++++--
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 6 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c
> index 8c3ac30..298312d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c
> @@ -591,6 +591,7 @@ struct kvm_pit *kvm_create_pit(struct kvm *kvm, u32 flags)
> {
> struct kvm_pit *pit;
> struct kvm_kpit_state *pit_state;
> + int ret;
>
> pit = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kvm_pit), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!pit)
> @@ -625,14 +626,31 @@ struct kvm_pit *kvm_create_pit(struct kvm *kvm, u32 flags)
> kvm_register_irq_mask_notifier(kvm, 0, &pit->mask_notifier);
>
> kvm_iodevice_init(&pit->dev, &pit_dev_ops);
> - __kvm_io_bus_register_dev(&kvm->pio_bus, &pit->dev);
> + ret = __kvm_io_bus_register_dev(&kvm->pio_bus, &pit->dev);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto fail;
>
> if (flags & KVM_PIT_SPEAKER_DUMMY) {
> kvm_iodevice_init(&pit->speaker_dev, &speaker_dev_ops);
> - __kvm_io_bus_register_dev(&kvm->pio_bus, &pit->speaker_dev);
> + ret = __kvm_io_bus_register_dev(&kvm->pio_bus,
> + &pit->speaker_dev);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto fail;
> }
>
> return pit;
> +
> +fail:
> + if (flags & KVM_PIT_SPEAKER_DUMMY)
> + __kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev(&kvm->pio_bus, &pit->speaker_dev);
> +
> + __kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev(&kvm->pio_bus, &pit->dev);
The above works because we scan the whole array; so it's safe to call
unregister on a device that we didn't register, and even on a device we
didn't init. But IMO it's cleaner not to assume this and do
cleanup properly. No?
> +
> + if (pit->irq_source_id >= 0)
> + kvm_free_irq_source_id(kvm, pit->irq_source_id);
> +
> + kfree(pit);
> + return NULL;
> }
>
> void kvm_free_pit(struct kvm *kvm)
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c b/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c
> index 1d1bb75..670e426 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c
> @@ -536,6 +536,8 @@ static const struct kvm_io_device_ops picdev_ops = {
> struct kvm_pic *kvm_create_pic(struct kvm *kvm)
> {
> struct kvm_pic *s;
> + int ret;
> +
> s = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kvm_pic), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!s)
> return NULL;
> @@ -552,6 +554,11 @@ struct kvm_pic *kvm_create_pic(struct kvm *kvm)
> * Initialize PIO device
> */
> kvm_iodevice_init(&s->dev, &picdev_ops);
> - kvm_io_bus_register_dev(kvm, &kvm->pio_bus, &s->dev);
> + ret = kvm_io_bus_register_dev(kvm, &kvm->pio_bus, &s->dev);
> + if (ret < 0) {
I thought the function returns 0 on success?
If so can we just if (ret) all over?
> + kfree(s);
> + return NULL;
> + }
> +
kill empty line
> return s;
> }
> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> index 8e04a34..306bc67 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> @@ -64,10 +64,14 @@ int kvm_io_bus_write(struct kvm_io_bus *bus, gpa_t addr, int len,
> const void *val);
> int kvm_io_bus_read(struct kvm_io_bus *bus, gpa_t addr, int len,
> void *val);
> -void __kvm_io_bus_register_dev(struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> +int __kvm_io_bus_register_dev(struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> + struct kvm_io_device *dev);
> +int kvm_io_bus_register_dev(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> + struct kvm_io_device *dev);
> +void __kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev(struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> + struct kvm_io_device *dev);
> +void kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> struct kvm_io_device *dev);
> -void kvm_io_bus_register_dev(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> - struct kvm_io_device *dev);
>
> struct kvm_vcpu {
> struct kvm *kvm;
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c b/virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c
> index 0352f81..04d69cd 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/coalesced_mmio.c
> @@ -92,6 +92,7 @@ static const struct kvm_io_device_ops coalesced_mmio_ops = {
> int kvm_coalesced_mmio_init(struct kvm *kvm)
> {
> struct kvm_coalesced_mmio_dev *dev;
> + int ret;
>
> dev = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kvm_coalesced_mmio_dev), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!dev)
> @@ -100,9 +101,12 @@ int kvm_coalesced_mmio_init(struct kvm *kvm)
> kvm_iodevice_init(&dev->dev, &coalesced_mmio_ops);
> dev->kvm = kvm;
> kvm->coalesced_mmio_dev = dev;
> - kvm_io_bus_register_dev(kvm, &kvm->mmio_bus, &dev->dev);
>
> - return 0;
> + ret = kvm_io_bus_register_dev(kvm, &kvm->mmio_bus, &dev->dev);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + kfree(dev);
> +
kill empty line
> + return ret;
> }
>
> int kvm_vm_ioctl_register_coalesced_mmio(struct kvm *kvm,
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/ioapic.c b/virt/kvm/ioapic.c
> index 92496ff..048836d 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/ioapic.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/ioapic.c
> @@ -340,6 +340,7 @@ static const struct kvm_io_device_ops ioapic_mmio_ops = {
> int kvm_ioapic_init(struct kvm *kvm)
> {
> struct kvm_ioapic *ioapic;
> + int ret;
>
> ioapic = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kvm_ioapic), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!ioapic)
> @@ -348,7 +349,10 @@ int kvm_ioapic_init(struct kvm *kvm)
> kvm_ioapic_reset(ioapic);
> kvm_iodevice_init(&ioapic->dev, &ioapic_mmio_ops);
> ioapic->kvm = kvm;
> - kvm_io_bus_register_dev(kvm, &kvm->mmio_bus, &ioapic->dev);
> - return 0;
> + ret = kvm_io_bus_register_dev(kvm, &kvm->mmio_bus, &ioapic->dev);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + kfree(ioapic);
kill empty line
> +
> + return ret;
> }
>
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> index 05b6bc7..11595c7 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> @@ -2533,21 +2533,52 @@ int kvm_io_bus_read(struct kvm_io_bus *bus, gpa_t addr, int len, void *val)
> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> }
>
> -void kvm_io_bus_register_dev(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> +int kvm_io_bus_register_dev(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> struct kvm_io_device *dev)
Let's document return value?
> {
> + int ret;
> +
> down_write(&kvm->slots_lock);
> - __kvm_io_bus_register_dev(bus, dev);
> + ret = __kvm_io_bus_register_dev(bus, dev);
> up_write(&kvm->slots_lock);
kill empty line? this one is kind of iffy
> +
> + return ret;
> }
>
> /* An unlocked version. Caller must have write lock on slots_lock. */
> -void __kvm_io_bus_register_dev(struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> - struct kvm_io_device *dev)
> +int __kvm_io_bus_register_dev(struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> + struct kvm_io_device *dev)
> {
> - BUG_ON(bus->dev_count > (NR_IOBUS_DEVS-1));
> + if (bus->dev_count > (NR_IOBUS_DEVS-1))
as long as we are touching this: (NR_IOBUS_DEVS-1) -> NR_IOBUS_DEVS - 1?
> + return -ENOSPC;
>
> bus->devs[bus->dev_count++] = dev;
kill empty line
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +void kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev(struct kvm *kvm,
> + struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> + struct kvm_io_device *dev)
> +{
> + down_write(&kvm->slots_lock);
> + __kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev(bus, dev);
> + up_write(&kvm->slots_lock);
> +}
> +
> +/* An unlocked version. Caller must have write lock on slots_lock. */
> +void __kvm_io_bus_unregister_dev(struct kvm_io_bus *bus,
> + struct kvm_io_device *dev)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < bus->dev_count; i++) {
> +
kill empty line
> + if (bus->devs[i] == dev) {
> + bus->devs[i] = bus->devs[--bus->dev_count];
> + break;
> + }
> + }
no {} around single statement
> }
>
> static struct notifier_block kvm_cpu_notifier = {
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-07 11:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-06 20:33 [KVM PATCH v9 0/2] iosignalfd Gregory Haskins
2009-07-06 20:33 ` [KVM PATCH v9 1/2] KVM: make io_bus interface more robust Gregory Haskins
2009-07-07 11:20 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2009-07-07 17:26 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-07-08 7:47 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-07-08 11:40 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-07-06 20:33 ` [KVM PATCH v9 2/2] KVM: add iosignalfd support Gregory Haskins
2009-07-07 11:20 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-07-07 11:53 ` Avi Kivity
2009-07-07 12:22 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-07-07 12:27 ` Avi Kivity
2009-07-07 12:51 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-07-07 12:56 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-07-07 13:21 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-07-07 13:30 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-07-07 12:56 ` Avi Kivity
2009-07-07 13:17 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-07-07 12:15 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-07-07 12:48 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-07-07 12:56 ` Avi Kivity
2009-07-07 12:58 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-07-07 13:16 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-07-07 9:22 ` [KVM PATCH v9 0/2] iosignalfd Avi Kivity
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090707112035.GB3647@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.