[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150513232745.GA8158@gwshan>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 09:27:45 +1000
From: Gavin Shan <gwshan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>
Cc: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>,
Gavin Shan <gwshan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Wei Yang <weiyang@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH kernel v10 05/34] powerpc/iommu: Always release
iommu_table in iommu_free_table()
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 02:51:36PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
>On Wed, 13 May 2015 16:30:16 +1000
>Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru> wrote:
>
>> On 05/13/2015 03:33 PM, Gavin Shan wrote:
>> > On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 01:38:54AM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
>> >> At the moment iommu_free_table() only releases memory if
>> >> the table was initialized for the platform code use, i.e. it had
>> >> it_map initialized (which purpose is to track DMA memory space use).
>> >>
>> >> With dynamic DMA windows, we will need to be able to release
>> >> iommu_table even if it was used for VFIO in which case it_map is NULL
>> >> so does the patch.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@...abs.ru>
>> >
>> > Reviewed-by: Gavin Shan <gwshan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> >
>> >> ---
>> >> arch/powerpc/kernel/iommu.c | 3 +--
>> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> >>
>> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/iommu.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/iommu.c
>> >> index 3d47eb3..2c02d4c 100644
>> >> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/iommu.c
>> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/iommu.c
>> >> @@ -714,8 +714,7 @@ void iommu_free_table(struct iommu_table *tbl, const char *node_name)
>> >> unsigned int order;
>> >>
>> >> if (!tbl || !tbl->it_map) {
>> >> - printk(KERN_ERR "%s: expected TCE map for %s\n", __func__,
>> >> - node_name);
>> >> + kfree(tbl);
>> >
>> > I'm not sure if the "tbl" needs to be checked against NULL as kfree() already
>> > has the check. But it looks a bit strange to free NULL "tbl" from the code
>> > itself.
>>
>> Yeah, looks a bit weird, agree, I'll change but in general kfree/vfree/...
>> - they all check the passed pointer for NULL.
>
>But if tbl is NULL, the tbl->it_map check will fail, won't it? So in
>this case, I think you have to keep it.
>
If I understood your question correctly, "tbl->it_map" won't be checked
when "tbl" is NULL because the connection ("||") for the two conditions.
The code can be changed to something like below if Alexey want:
if (!tbl)
return;
if (!tbl->itmap)
kfree(tbl);
Thanks,
Gavin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists