On Sun, May 22, 2022 at 03:59:01PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> In the error paths introduced by the commit in the Fixes tag, a mutex may
> be left locked.
> Add the correct goto instead of a direct return.
>
> Fixes: a1468175bb17 ("vhost-vdpa: support ASID based IOTLB API")
> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> WARNING: This patch only fixes the goto vs return mix-up in this function.
> However, the 2nd hunk looks really spurious to me. I think that the:
> - return -EINVAL;
> + r = -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock;
> should be done only in the 'if (!iotlb)' block.
>
> As I don't know this code, I just leave it as-is but draw your attention
> in case this is another bug lurking.
> ---
> drivers/vhost/vdpa.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c b/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> index 1f1d1c425573..3e86080041fc 100644
> --- a/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> @@ -1000,7 +1000,8 @@ static int vhost_vdpa_process_iotlb_msg(struct vhost_dev *dev, u32 asid,
> if (!as) {
> dev_err(&v->dev, "can't find and alloc asid %d\n",
> asid);
> - return -EINVAL;
> + r = -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock;
> }
> iotlb = &as->iotlb;
> } else
> @@ -1013,7 +1014,8 @@ static int vhost_vdpa_process_iotlb_msg(struct vhost_dev *dev, u32 asid,
> }
> if (!iotlb)
> dev_err(&v->dev, "no iotlb for asid %d\n", asid);
> - return -EINVAL;
> + r = -EINVAL;
> + goto unlock;
> }
>
> switch (msg->type) {
> --
> 2.34.1
