On 11/2/22 11:01 AM, Eric Farman wrote:
> Now that the mdev parent data is split out into its own struct,
> it is safe to move the remaining private data to follow the
> mdev probe/remove lifecycle. The mdev parent data will remain
> where it is, and follow the subchannel and the css driver
> interfaces.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Farman <farman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c | 15 +--------------
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
> drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_private.h | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
>
...
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c
> index eb0b8cc210bb..e45d4acb109b 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c
> @@ -100,15 +100,20 @@ static int vfio_ccw_mdev_probe(struct mdev_device *mdev)
> {
> struct subchannel *sch = to_subchannel(mdev->dev.parent);
> struct vfio_ccw_parent *parent = dev_get_drvdata(&sch->dev);
> - struct vfio_ccw_private *private = dev_get_drvdata(&parent->dev);
> + struct vfio_ccw_private *private;
> int ret;
>
> - if (private->state == VFIO_CCW_STATE_NOT_OPER)
> - return -ENODEV;
> + private = kzalloc(sizeof(*private), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!private)
> + return -ENOMEM;
Ha, looks like you time traveled and took my advice :)
In fact it looks like some of my other comments from patch 1 get cleaned up here too -- but would still be good to make those changes in patch 1 for completeness/bisect.
Reviewed-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
