On 2/14/22 3:26 AM, Tianfei zhang wrote:
From: Matthew Gerlach <matthew.gerlach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
When a port is not connected to the same PCIe endpoint as
the FME, the port does not need to be released before being
virtualized. Fix VF creation code to handle this new use
Similar, how does this fit in with iofs, this looks like it would not be
valid for the existing cards
case.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Gerlach <matthew.gerlach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Tianfei Zhang <tianfei.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/fpga/dfl.c | 11 +++++++++--
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/fpga/dfl.c b/drivers/fpga/dfl.c
index 26f8cf890700..cfc539a656f0 100644
--- a/drivers/fpga/dfl.c
+++ b/drivers/fpga/dfl.c
@@ -1705,15 +1705,22 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dfl_fpga_cdev_config_ports_pf);
int dfl_fpga_cdev_config_ports_vf(struct dfl_fpga_cdev *cdev, int num_vfs)
{
struct dfl_feature_platform_data *pdata;
- int ret = 0;
+ int ret = 0, port_count = 0;
mutex_lock(&cdev->lock);
+
+ list_for_each_entry(pdata, &cdev->port_dev_list, node) {
+ if (pdata->dev)
This looks wrong,
pdata->dev is dereferenced below, if there is a case were (!pdata->dev)
here there would be crash later.
+ continue;
+ port_count++;
how does this work when only some of the ports are handled in the new way ?
Tom
+ }
+
/*
* can't turn multiple ports into 1 VF device, only 1 port for 1 VF
* device, so if released port number doesn't match VF device number,
* then reject the request with -EINVAL error code.
*/
- if (cdev->released_port_num != num_vfs) {
+ if (port_count && cdev->released_port_num != num_vfs) {
ret = -EINVAL;
goto done;
}
