| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <c705be10-bbe2-7d44-3057-005299ab6785@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2022 10:49:56 -0400
From: "Jason J. Herne" <jjherne@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: freude@...ux.ibm.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com, cohuck@...hat.com,
mjrosato@...ux.ibm.com, pasic@...ux.ibm.com,
alex.williamson@...hat.com, kwankhede@...dia.com,
fiuczy@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 02/20] s390/vfio-ap: move probe and remove callbacks
to vfio_ap_ops.c
On 4/4/22 18:10, Tony Krowiak wrote:
> Let's move the probe and remove callbacks into the vfio_ap_ops.c
> file to keep all code related to managing queues in a single file. This
> way, all functions related to queue management can be removed from the
> vfio_ap_private.h header file defining the public interfaces for the
> vfio_ap device driver.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
> drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c | 59 +--------------------------
> drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c | 31 +++++++++++++-
> drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_private.h | 5 ++-
> 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 61 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c
> index 29ebd54f8919..9a300dd3b6f7 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c
> @@ -104,64 +104,9 @@ static const struct attribute_group vfio_queue_attr_group = {
> .attrs = vfio_queue_attrs,
> };
>
> -/**
> - * vfio_ap_queue_dev_probe: Allocate a vfio_ap_queue structure and associate it
> - * with the device as driver_data.
> - *
> - * @apdev: the AP device being probed
> - *
> - * Return: returns 0 if the probe succeeded; otherwise, returns an error if
> - * storage could not be allocated for a vfio_ap_queue object or the
> - * sysfs 'status' attribute could not be created for the queue device.
> - */
> -static int vfio_ap_queue_dev_probe(struct ap_device *apdev)
> -{
> - int ret;
> - struct vfio_ap_queue *q;
> -
> - q = kzalloc(sizeof(*q), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!q)
> - return -ENOMEM;
> -
> - mutex_lock(&matrix_dev->lock);
> - dev_set_drvdata(&apdev->device, q);
> - q->apqn = to_ap_queue(&apdev->device)->qid;
> - q->saved_isc = VFIO_AP_ISC_INVALID;
> -
> - ret = sysfs_create_group(&apdev->device.kobj, &vfio_queue_attr_group);
> - if (ret) {
> - dev_set_drvdata(&apdev->device, NULL);
> - kfree(q);
> - }
> -
> - mutex_unlock(&matrix_dev->lock);
> -
> - return ret;
> -}
> -
> -/**
> - * vfio_ap_queue_dev_remove: Free the associated vfio_ap_queue structure.
> - *
> - * @apdev: the AP device being removed
> - *
> - * Takes the matrix lock to avoid actions on this device while doing the remove.
> - */
> -static void vfio_ap_queue_dev_remove(struct ap_device *apdev)
> -{
> - struct vfio_ap_queue *q;
> -
> - mutex_lock(&matrix_dev->lock);
> - sysfs_remove_group(&apdev->device.kobj, &vfio_queue_attr_group);
> - q = dev_get_drvdata(&apdev->device);
> - vfio_ap_mdev_reset_queue(q, 1);
> - dev_set_drvdata(&apdev->device, NULL);
> - kfree(q);
> - mutex_unlock(&matrix_dev->lock);
> -}
> -
> static struct ap_driver vfio_ap_drv = {
> - .probe = vfio_ap_queue_dev_probe,
> - .remove = vfio_ap_queue_dev_remove,
> + .probe = vfio_ap_mdev_probe_queue,
> + .remove = vfio_ap_mdev_remove_queue,
> .ids = ap_queue_ids,
> };
>
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c
> index 2227919fde13..16220157dbe3 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c
> @@ -1314,8 +1314,7 @@ static struct vfio_ap_queue *vfio_ap_find_queue(int apqn)
> return q;
> }
>
> -int vfio_ap_mdev_reset_queue(struct vfio_ap_queue *q,
> - unsigned int retry)
> +static int vfio_ap_mdev_reset_queue(struct vfio_ap_queue *q, unsigned int retry)
> {
> struct ap_queue_status status;
> int ret;
> @@ -1524,3 +1523,31 @@ void vfio_ap_mdev_unregister(void)
> mdev_unregister_device(&matrix_dev->device);
> mdev_unregister_driver(&vfio_ap_matrix_driver);
> }
> +
> +int vfio_ap_mdev_probe_queue(struct ap_device *apdev)
> +{
> + struct vfio_ap_queue *q;
> +
> + q = kzalloc(sizeof(*q), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!q)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + mutex_lock(&matrix_dev->lock);
> + q->apqn = to_ap_queue(&apdev->device)->qid;
> + q->saved_isc = VFIO_AP_ISC_INVALID;
> + dev_set_drvdata(&apdev->device, q);
> + mutex_unlock(&matrix_dev->lock);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +void vfio_ap_mdev_remove_queue(struct ap_device *apdev)
> +{
> + struct vfio_ap_queue *q;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&matrix_dev->lock);
> + q = dev_get_drvdata(&apdev->device);
> + vfio_ap_mdev_reset_queue(q, 1);
> + dev_set_drvdata(&apdev->device, NULL);
> + kfree(q);
> + mutex_unlock(&matrix_dev->lock);
> +}
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_private.h b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_private.h
> index 648fcaf8104a..3cade25a1620 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_private.h
> +++ b/drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_private.h
> @@ -119,7 +119,8 @@ struct vfio_ap_queue {
>
> int vfio_ap_mdev_register(void);
> void vfio_ap_mdev_unregister(void);
> -int vfio_ap_mdev_reset_queue(struct vfio_ap_queue *q,
> - unsigned int retry);
> +
> +int vfio_ap_mdev_probe_queue(struct ap_device *queue);
> +void vfio_ap_mdev_remove_queue(struct ap_device *queue);
>
> #endif /* _VFIO_AP_PRIVATE_H_ */
With this commit, you did more than just move the probe/remove functions. You also changed
their behavior. The call to sysfs_create_group has been removed. So the following in
vfop_ap_drv.c becomes dead code:
vfio_ap_mdev_for_queue
status_show
static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(status);
vfio_queue_attrs
vfio_queue_attr_group
Is this what you intended? If so, I assume we can live without the status attribute?
If this is the case then you'll want to remove all the dead code.
--
-- Jason J. Herne (jjherne@...ux.ibm.com)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists