From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yisheng Xie <xieyisheng1-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 09/36] iommu/fault: Allow blocking fault handlers
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 14:15:58 +0800
Message-ID: <7e1c8ea4-e568-1000-17de-62f8562c7169@huawei.com>
References: <20171006133203.22803-1-jean-philippe.brucker@arm.com>
	<20171006133203.22803-10-jean-philippe.brucker@arm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <20171006133203.22803-10-jean-philippe.brucker-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/iommu>,
	<mailto:iommu-request-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/iommu/>
List-Post: <mailto:iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iommu-request-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu>,
	<mailto:iommu-request-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org
Errors-To: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org
To: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe.brucker-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-acpi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, iommu-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org
Cc: mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, gabriele.paoloni-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, will.deacon-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, okaya-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org, rfranz-YGCgFSpz5w/QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, lenb-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, bhelgaas-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, dwmw2-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org, rjw-LthD3rsA81gm4RdzfppkhA@public.gmane.org, sudeep.holla-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org

Hi Jean,

On 2017/10/6 21:31, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> -	if (domain->ext_handler) {
> +	if (domain->handler_flags & IOMMU_FAULT_HANDLER_ATOMIC) {
> +		fault->flags |= IOMMU_FAULT_ATOMIC;

Why remove the condition of domain->ext_handler? should it be much better like:
  if ((domain->handler_flags & IOMMU_FAULT_HANDLER_ATOMIC) && domain->ext_handler)

If domain->ext_handler is NULL, and (domain->handler_flags & IOMMU_FAULT_HANDLER_ATOMIC)
is true. It will oops, right?

>  		ret = domain->ext_handler(domain, dev, fault,
>  					  domain->handler_token);

Thanks
Yisheng Xie