On 17/11/14 09:27, wanghaibin wrote:
> Add a out_unlock flag, for the different unusual can goto the
> corresponding flag.
>
> Signed-off-by: wanghaibin <wanghaibin.wang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c | 8 +++++---
> 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
> index bd4b104..d6a6c05 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic.c
> @@ -1897,19 +1897,19 @@ int kvm_vgic_init(struct kvm *kvm)
> mutex_lock(&kvm->lock);
>
> if (vgic_initialized(kvm))
> - goto out;
> + goto out_unlock;
>
> if (IS_VGIC_ADDR_UNDEF(kvm->arch.vgic.vgic_dist_base) ||
> IS_VGIC_ADDR_UNDEF(kvm->arch.vgic.vgic_cpu_base)) {
> kvm_err("Need to set vgic cpu and dist addresses first\n");
> ret = -ENXIO;
> - goto out;
> + goto out_unlock;
> }
>
> ret = vgic_init_maps(kvm);
> if (ret) {
> kvm_err("Unable to allocate maps\n");
> - goto out;
> + goto out_unlock;
> }
>
> ret = kvm_phys_addr_ioremap(kvm, kvm->arch.vgic.vgic_cpu_base,
> @@ -1927,6 +1927,8 @@ int kvm_vgic_init(struct kvm *kvm)
> out:
> if (ret)
> kvm_vgic_destroy(kvm);
> +
> +out_unlock:
> mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
> return ret;
> }
>
Sorry, but I really have to ask: What does this buy us? Please tell me,
because I'm struggling to see how this patch optimizes anything
moderately relevant.
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
