>>> On 03.04.17 at 16:36, <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: >>>> On 02.04.17 at 14:24, <yu.c.zh...@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c >> @@ -317,6 +317,15 @@ int p2m_set_ioreq_server(struct domain *d, >> if ( p2m->ioreq.server != NULL ) >> goto out; >> >> + /* >> + * It is possible that an ioreq server has just been unmapped, >> + * released the spin lock, with some p2m_ioreq_server entries >> + * in p2m table remained. We shall refuse another ioreq server >> + * mapping request in such case. >> + */ >> + if ( read_atomic(&p2m->ioreq.entry_count) ) >> + goto out; > > So this produces the same -EINVAL as the earlier check in context > above. I think it would be nice if neither did - -EINUSE for the first > (which we don't have, so -EOPNOTSUPP would seem the second > bets option there) and -EBUSY for the second would seem more > appropriate. If you agree, respective adjustments could be done > while committing, if no other reason for a v11 arises.
Oh, and with that Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
