On Wednesday 13 May 2009 11:55:50 Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 11:36 +0800, Yang, Sheng wrote:
> > On Wednesday 13 May 2009 06:14:01 Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > --- a/hw/device-assignment.c
> > > +++ b/hw/device-assignment.c
> > > @@ -798,7 +798,7 @@ static void assigned_dev_update_msi(PCIDevice
> > > *pci_dev, unsigned int ctrl_pos) pci_dev->cap.start + PCI_MSI_DATA_32);
> > > assigned_dev->entry->type = KVM_IRQ_ROUTING_MSI;
> > > assigned_dev->entry->gsi = kvm_get_irq_route_gsi(kvm_context);
> > > - if (assigned_dev->entry->gsi < 0) {
> > > + if ((int)(assigned_dev->entry->gsi) < 0) {
> > > perror("assigned_dev_update_msi: kvm_get_irq_route_gsi");
> > > return;
> > > }
> >
> > Use a return value(r) seems better.
>
> Hi Sheng,
>
> Do you mean:
>
> r = kvm_get_irq_route_gsi(kvm_context);
> if (r < 0) {
> ...
> }
> assigned_dev->entry->gsi = r;
Yes.
> > And I realized there is memory leak here. Entry seems haven't been freed
> > for error... So does MSI-X...
>
> I hadn't noticed that one, but now that you mention it, yep. Thanks,
Thanks. :)
--
regards
Yang, Sheng
--
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
