On 2020/7/21 上午10:02, Zhu, Lingshan wrote:
On 7/20/2020 5:40 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
On 2020/7/20 下午5:07, Zhu, Lingshan wrote:
+}
+
+static void vdpa_unsetup_irq(struct vdpa_device *vdev, int qid)
+{
+ struct vdpa_driver *drv = drv_to_vdpa(vdev->dev.driver);
+
+ if (drv->unsetup_vq_irq)
+ drv->unsetup_vq_irq(vdev, qid);
Do you need to check the existence of drv before calling
unset_vq_irq()?
Yes, we should check this when we take the releasing path into account.
And how can this synchronize with driver releasing and binding?
Will add an vdpa_unsetup_irq() call in vhsot_vdpa_release().
For binding, I think it is a new dev bound to the the driver,
it should go through the vdpa_setup_irq() routine. or if it is
a device re-bind to vhost_vdpa, I think we have cleaned up
irq_bypass_producer for it as we would call vhdpa_unsetup_irq()
in the release function.
I meant can the following things happen?
1) some vDPA device driver probe the hardware and call
vdpa_request_irq() in its PCI probe function.
2) vDPA device is probed by vhost-vDPA
Then irq bypass can't work since we when vdpa_unsetup_irq() is
called, there's no driver bound. Or is there a requirement that
vdap_request/free_irq() must be called somewhere (e.g in the
set_status bus operations)? If yes, we need document those requirements.
vdpa_unseup_irq is only called when we want to unregister the producer,
Typo, I meant vdpa_setup_irq().
Thanks
now we have two code path using it: free_irq and relaase(). I agree we can document this requirements for the helpers, these functions can only be called through status changes(DRIVER_OK and !DRIVER_OK).
Thanks,
BR
Zhu Lingshan
Thanks
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
