23.05.2014 07:44, Jules Wang wrote:
> Calling dma_bdrv_unmap() twice is not necessary and may cause
> potential problems if some code changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jules Wang <junqing.w...@cs2c.com.cn>
> ---
> dma-helpers.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/dma-helpers.c b/dma-helpers.c
> index 5f421e9..53cbe92 100644
> --- a/dma-helpers.c
> +++ b/dma-helpers.c
> @@ -143,12 +143,12 @@ static void dma_bdrv_cb(void *opaque, int ret)
>
> dbs->acb = NULL;
> dbs->sector_num += dbs->iov.size / 512;
> - dma_bdrv_unmap(dbs);
>
> if (dbs->sg_cur_index == dbs->sg->nsg || ret < 0) {
> dma_complete(dbs, ret);
> return;
> }
> + dma_bdrv_unmap(dbs);
>
> while (dbs->sg_cur_index < dbs->sg->nsg) {
> cur_addr = dbs->sg->sg[dbs->sg_cur_index].base + dbs->sg_cur_byte;
Applied to -trivial!
Maybe not-so-trivial, as I had to look at dma_complete() (who calls
dma_bdrv_unmap() ofcourse) to understand what's going on :)
Thank you!
/mjt
