From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 16:57:06 +0100 From: Cornelia Huck Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] s390/vfio-ap: clean up vfio_ap resources when KVM pointer invalidated Message-ID: <20201222165706.66e0120d.cohuck@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <853da84f-092b-6b94-62d5-628f440abc40@linux.ibm.com> References: <20201221185625.24914-1-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com> <20201222050521.46af2bf1.pasic@linux.ibm.com> <853da84f-092b-6b94-62d5-628f440abc40@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-ID: To: Tony Krowiak Cc: Halil Pasic , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com, pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 10:37:01 -0500 Tony Krowiak wrote: > On 12/21/20 11:05 PM, Halil Pasic wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Dec 2020 13:56:25 -0500 > > Tony Krowiak wrote: > >> static int vfio_ap_mdev_group_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb, > >> unsigned long action, void *data) > >> { > >> - int ret; > >> + int ret, notify_rc = NOTIFY_DONE; > >> struct ap_matrix_mdev *matrix_mdev; > >> > >> if (action != VFIO_GROUP_NOTIFY_SET_KVM) > >> return NOTIFY_OK; > >> > >> matrix_mdev = container_of(nb, struct ap_matrix_mdev, group_notifier); > >> + mutex_lock(&matrix_dev->lock); > >> > >> if (!data) { > >> - matrix_mdev->kvm = NULL; > >> - return NOTIFY_OK; > >> + if (matrix_mdev->kvm) > >> + vfio_ap_mdev_unset_kvm(matrix_mdev); > >> + notify_rc = NOTIFY_OK; > >> + goto notify_done; > >> } > >> > >> ret = vfio_ap_mdev_set_kvm(matrix_mdev, data); > >> if (ret) > >> - return NOTIFY_DONE; > >> + goto notify_done; > >> > >> /* If there is no CRYCB pointer, then we can't copy the masks */ > >> if (!matrix_mdev->kvm->arch.crypto.crycbd) > >> - return NOTIFY_DONE; > >> + goto notify_done; > >> > >> kvm_arch_crypto_set_masks(matrix_mdev->kvm, matrix_mdev->matrix.apm, > >> matrix_mdev->matrix.aqm, > >> matrix_mdev->matrix.adm); > >> > >> - return NOTIFY_OK; > > Shouldn't there be an > > + notify_rc = NOTIFY_OK; > > here? I mean you initialize notify_rc to NOTIFY_DONE, in the !data branch > > on success you set notify_rc to NOTIFY_OK, but in the !!data branch it > > just stays NOTIFY_DONE. Or am I missing something? > > I don't think it matters much since NOTIFY_OK and NOTIFY_DONE have > no further effect on processing of the notification queue, but I believe > you are correct, this is a change from what we originally had. I can > restore the original return values if you'd prefer. Even if they have the same semantics now, that might change in the future; restoring the original behaviour looks like the right thing to do. > > > > > Otherwise LGTM! Same here. > > > > Regards, > > Halil > > > >> +notify_done: > >> + mutex_unlock(&matrix_dev->lock); > >> + return notify_rc; > >> } > >> > > [..] >