On Thu, 12 Aug 2021 09:26:17 +0200 Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 04:03:41PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote: > > > + dev_warn(dev, "Adding kernel taint for vfio-noiommu group on device\n"); > > > + return vfio_noiommu_group_alloc(dev); > > > > Nit, we taint regardless of the success of this function, should we > > move the tainting back into the function (using the flags to skip for > > mdev in subsequent patches) or swap the order to check the return value > > before tainting? Thanks, > > Does it really matter to have the extra thread if a memory allocation > failed when going down this route? Extra thread? In practice this is unlikely to ever fail, but if we've chosen the point at which we have a no-iommu group as where we taint, then let's at least be consistent and not move that back to the point where we tried to make a no-iommu group, regardless of whether it was successful. Thanks, Alex
