Am 29.11.21 um 04:43 schrieb Longpeng(Mike):
From: Longpeng <longpeng2@xxxxxxxxxx>
The comment above the invocation of vfs_poll() is misleading, move
it to the right place.
I think that the current variant is better.
events is only used in that function to check for EPOLLIN, so the
assignment and the if belong together from a "what am I doing here" perspective.
Fixes: 684a0b719ddb ("KVM: eventfd: Fix lock order inversion")
Signed-off-by: Longpeng <longpeng2@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
virt/kvm/eventfd.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/eventfd.c b/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
index 2ad013b..cd01814 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/eventfd.c
@@ -406,12 +406,12 @@ bool __attribute__((weak)) kvm_arch_irqfd_route_changed(
spin_unlock_irq(&kvm->irqfds.lock);
+ events = vfs_poll(f.file, &irqfd->pt);
+
/*
* Check if there was an event already pending on the eventfd
* before we registered, and trigger it as if we didn't miss it.
*/
- events = vfs_poll(f.file, &irqfd->pt);
-
if (events & EPOLLIN)
schedule_work(&irqfd->inject);
