Hi,
On 1/30/20 2:52 PM, Andre Przywara wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 13:47:52 +0000
> Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Failling an mmap call or creating a memslot means that device emulation
>> will not work, don't ignore it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> hw/vesa.c | 6 ++++--
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/vesa.c b/hw/vesa.c
>> index b92cc990b730..a665736a76d7 100644
>> --- a/hw/vesa.c
>> +++ b/hw/vesa.c
>> @@ -76,9 +76,11 @@ struct framebuffer *vesa__init(struct kvm *kvm)
>>
>> mem = mmap(NULL, VESA_MEM_SIZE, PROT_RW, MAP_ANON_NORESERVE, -1, 0);
>> if (mem == MAP_FAILED)
>> - ERR_PTR(-errno);
>> + return ERR_PTR(-errno);
>>
>> - kvm__register_dev_mem(kvm, VESA_MEM_ADDR, VESA_MEM_SIZE, mem);
>> + r = kvm__register_dev_mem(kvm, VESA_MEM_ADDR, VESA_MEM_SIZE, mem);
>> + if (r < 0)
>> + return ERR_PTR(r);
> For the sake of correctness, we should munmap here, I think.
> With that fixed:
>
> Reviewed-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@xxxxxxx>
Actually, I think the correct cleanup order should be munmap(mem) ->
device__unregister(vesa_device) -> ioport__unregister(vesa_base_addr). I'll drop
your R-b.
Thanks,
Alex
>
> Cheers,
> Andre.
>
>>
>> vesafb = (struct framebuffer) {
>> .width = VESA_WIDTH,
