On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 6:29 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 12:12:42PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > >@@ -682,6 +553,11 @@ static int vdpasim_dma_unmap(struct vdpa_device *vdpa, unsigned int asid,
> > > > if (asid >= vdpasim->dev_attr.nas)
> > > > return -EINVAL;
> > > >
> > > >+ if (vdpasim->iommu_pt[asid]) {
> > >
> > > We are in the vdpasim_dma_unmap, so if vdpasim->iommu_pt[asid] is true,
> > > should be better to return an error, since this case should not happen?
> >
> > So it's a question of how to behave when unmap is called without a
> > map. I think we can leave the code as is or if we wish, it needs a
> > separate patch.
> >
> > (We didn't error this previously anyhow).
> >
> > Thanks
>
> OK I picked as is. Do we want WARN_ON maybe?
This could be triggered by the userspace, so I'm not sure it's worth it.
Thanks
>
> --
> MST
>
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
