On 9/4/20 2:10 PM, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 01:38:53PM +0200, Janosch Frank wrote: >>>> * Requests the Ultravisor to encrypt a guest page and make it >>>> * accessible to the host for paging (export). >>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c b/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c >>>> index 373542ca1113..cfb0017f33a7 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c >>>> +++ b/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c >>>> @@ -2679,7 +2679,7 @@ static int __s390_reset_acc(pte_t *ptep, unsigned long addr, >>>> pte_t pte = READ_ONCE(*ptep); >>>> >>>> if (pte_present(pte)) >>>> - WARN_ON_ONCE(uv_convert_from_secure(pte_val(pte) & PAGE_MASK)); >>>> + WARN_ON_ONCE(uv_destroy_page(pte_val(pte) & PAGE_MASK)); >>> >>> Why not put the WARN_ON_ONCE() into uv_destroy_page() and make that >>> function return void? >>> >> If you prefer that, I'll change the patch. > > Seems to be better to me. Otherwise you start to sprinkle WARN_ONs all > over the code, _if_ there would be more callers. The other call sites currently don't care about the return codes which is not optimal. I'd prefer to leave it as is and put a debug item on the todo list which takes care of providing more debug data on error. > >> I think we'd need a proper print of the return codes of the UVC anyway, >> the warn isn't very helpful if you want to debug after the fact. > > Maybe a new debug feature? Well, but that's something that hasn't do > anything with this code.
