linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] s390: vfio-ap: fix warning reset not completed

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <633ff646-de9b-9d6b-2d35-b09a60d33eee@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Sep 2019 11:08:14 -0400
From:   Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
        Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Harald Freudenberger <freude@...ux.ibm.com>,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] s390: vfio-ap: fix warning reset not completed

On 9/3/19 12:45 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Tue,  3 Sep 2019 15:36:18 +0200
> Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> "fix warning for not completed reset"?
> 
>> The intention seems to be to warn once when we don't wait enough for the
>> reset to complete. Let's use the right retry counter to accomplish that
>> semantic.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c
>> index 0604b49a4d32..5c0f53c6dde7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c
>> +++ b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c
>> @@ -1143,7 +1143,7 @@ int vfio_ap_mdev_reset_queue(unsigned int apid, unsigned int apqi,
>>   				msleep(20);
>>   				status = ap_tapq(apqn, NULL);
>>   			}
>> -			WARN_ON_ONCE(retry <= 0);
>> +			WARN_ON_ONCE(retry2 <= 0);
>>   			return 0;
>>   		case AP_RESPONSE_RESET_IN_PROGRESS:
>>   		case AP_RESPONSE_BUSY:
> 
> Makes sense.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>

Agreed:
Reviewed-by: Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>
>