On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 02:40:03PM +0100, Eric Auger wrote: > On 01/11/2015 10:17 PM, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 05:07:11PM +0100, Eric Auger wrote: > >> On arm/arm64, the interrupt controller is dynamically instantiated. > >> There is a risk the user-space assigns an irqfd before this latter > >> is initialized and ready to accept virtual irq injection. On such > >> attempt, the IRQFD setup is rejected and -EAGAIN is returned. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.auger@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> virt/kvm/eventfd.c | 3 +++ > >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/virt/kvm/eventfd.c b/virt/kvm/eventfd.c > >> index b0fb390..f837c83 100644 > >> --- a/virt/kvm/eventfd.c > >> +++ b/virt/kvm/eventfd.c > >> @@ -314,6 +314,9 @@ kvm_irqfd_assign(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_irqfd *args) > >> unsigned int events; > >> int idx; > >> > >> + if (!kvm_arch_is_virtual_intc_initialized(kvm)) > >> + return -EAGAIN; > >> + > > > > You can fold this into the patch that defines the static inline since > > nothing defines the KVM_HAVE_ARCH_... yet. > Not sure to understand what you mean: > __KVM_HAVE_ARCH_VIRTUAL_INTC_INITIALIZED was defined in previous patch > file (3/5). Nethertheless I can drop that patch file. > I'm just saying that you don't need to split this into multiple patches. -Christoffer -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
