On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 05:07:37PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > On 6/23/23 15:07, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 03:04:17PM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > > > On 6/23/23 13:47, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jun 23, 2023 at 08:27:17AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote: > > > > > > + req_len = vma->vm_end - vma->vm_start; > > > > > > + pgoff = vma->vm_pgoff & > > > > > > + ((1U << (VFIO_PCI_OFFSET_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT)) - 1); > > > > > > + if (pgoff >= (nvdev->mem_prop.mem_length >> PAGE_SHIFT)) > > > > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > > > > > > > > you cound introduce accessor macros for nvdev->mem_prop.mem_length and > > > > > nvdev->mem_prop.hpa > > > > > > > > Accessors are not the usual style.. > > > > > > I meant something like > > > > > > #define nvgpu_mem_size(nvdev) (nvdev)->mem_prop.mem_length > > > #define nvgpu_mem_pa_base(nvdev) (nvdev)->mem_prop.hpa > > > > > > This is minor. > > > > Yeah, this is what I thought you ment, I'm against this kind of > > obfuscation in the kernel without a very strong purpose, and if you do > > something like this it should be a static inline function. > > OK. We could drop the intermediate struct attribute instead then. Yah, if the struct isn't needed for some other reason Jason
