Re: [PATCH] virtio_ring: add an error code check in virtqueue_resize

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2023/10/23 13:46, Xuan Zhuo wrote:
Well, what are the cases where it can happen practically?
Device error. Such as vp_active_vq()

Thanks.
Hmm interesting. OK. But do callers know to recover?
No.

So I think WARN + broken is suitable.

Thanks.
Sorry for the late, is the following code okay?

@@ -2739,7 +2739,7 @@ int virtqueue_resize(struct virtqueue *_vq, u32 num,
                        void (*recycle)(struct virtqueue *vq, void *buf))
    {
           struct vring_virtqueue *vq = to_vvq(_vq);
-       int err;
+       int err, err_reset;

           if (num > vq->vq.num_max)
                   return -E2BIG;
@@ -2759,7 +2759,15 @@ int virtqueue_resize(struct virtqueue *_vq, u32 num,
           else
                   err = virtqueue_resize_split(_vq, num);

-       return virtqueue_enable_after_reset(_vq);
+       err_reset = virtqueue_enable_after_reset(_vq);
+
+       if (err) {
No err.

err is not important.
You can remove that.
Emm, I'm a little confused that which code should I remove ?


like this:
	if (vq->packed_ring)
		virtqueue_resize_packed(_vq, num);
	else
		virtqueue_resize_split(_vq, num);

And we should set broken and warn inside virtqueue_enable_after_reset()?

In my opinion, we should return the error code of virtqueue_resize_packed() / virtqueue_resize_split().
But if this err is not important, this patch makes no sense.
Maybe I misunderstand somewhere...
If you think it's worth sending a patch, you can send it :).(I'm not familiar with this code).

Thanks,
Su Hui




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux