From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] vfio-ccw: concurrent I/O handling
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 18:31:24 +0100
Message-ID: <20190128183124.3d73ac6e.cohuck@redhat.com>
References: <20190121110354.2247-1-cohuck@redhat.com>
	<20190121110354.2247-3-cohuck@redhat.com>
	<2dac6201-9e71-b188-0385-d09d05071a1c@linux.ibm.com>
	<5627cb78-22b3-0557-7972-256bc9560d86@linux.ibm.com>
	<20190125112437.2c06fac6.cohuck@redhat.com>
	<d1f84cbc-2caf-1bd8-8607-79d5a3f9eb6d@linux.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	Pierre Morel <pmorel@linux.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
To: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
Return-path: <qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel2=m.gmane.org@nongnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <d1f84cbc-2caf-1bd8-8607-79d5a3f9eb6d@linux.ibm.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel2=m.gmane.org@nongnu.org
Sender: "Qemu-devel"
	<qemu-devel-bounces+gceq-qemu-devel2=m.gmane.org@nongnu.org>
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:22:56 -0500
Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> If we come into mdev_write with state=BUSY and we get the lock, 
> copy_from_user, and do our jump table we go to fsm_io_busy to set 
> ret_code and return -EAGAIN.  Why then don't we set the jump table for 
> state=NOT_OPER||STANDBY to do something that will return -EACCES instead 
> of how we currently do a direct return of -EACCES before all the 
> lock/copy stuff (and the jump table that would take us to fsm_io_error 
> and an error message before returning -EIO)?

If you phrase it like that, I'm wondering why we're not already doing
it that way :) We just need to make sure to revert to the previous
state on error instead of IDLE.