From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] vfio-ccw: make it safe to access channel programs References: <20190301093902.27799-1-cohuck@redhat.com> <20190301093902.27799-2-cohuck@redhat.com> <9e81af36-ebd2-671b-5256-90e8efaad6f2@linux.ibm.com> <20190408190747.12e3618b.cohuck@redhat.com> From: Eric Farman Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 16:25:11 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190408190747.12e3618b.cohuck@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <3f64d56f-e27a-3f95-6c44-2602dc00ea0f@linux.ibm.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: Cornelia Huck , Farhan Ali Cc: Halil Pasic , Pierre Morel , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org, Alex Williamson List-ID: On 4/8/19 1:07 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Mon, 8 Apr 2019 13:02:12 -0400 > Farhan Ali wrote: > >> On 03/01/2019 04:38 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>> When we get a solicited interrupt, the start function may have >>> been cleared by a csch, but we still have a channel program >>> structure allocated. Make it safe to call the cp accessors in >>> any case, so we can call them unconditionally. >>> >>> While at it, also make sure that functions called from other parts >>> of the code return gracefully if the channel program structure >>> has not been initialized (even though that is a bug in the caller). >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Eric Farman >>> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck >>> --- >> >> Hi Connie, >> >> My series of fixes for vfio-ccw depends on this patch as I would like to >> call cp_free unconditionally :) (I had developed my code on top of your >> patches). >> >> Could we pick this patch up as well when/if you pick up my patch series? >> I am in the process of sending out a v2. >> >> Regarding this patch we could merge it as a stand alone patch, separate >> from this series. And also the patch LGTM >> >> Reviewed-by: Farhan Ali > > Actually, I wanted to ask how people felt about merging this whole > series for the next release :) It would be one thing less on my plate... > I'm not opposed to it. Every time I try to review patches 4 and 6 I get an asynchronous interrupt of my own. :) I'll at least get you an ack in the next day or two.