On 22/07/16 09:50, Sander Eikelenboom wrote: > Thursday, July 21, 2016, 12:18:37 PM, you wrote: > >> c/s 74c6dc2d "x86/vMSI-X: defer intercept handler registration" caused MSI-X >> table infrastructure not to always be initialised, but it missed one path >> which needed an is-initialised check. >> If a devices is passed through to a domain which is MSI capable but not MSI-X >> capable, the call to msixtbl_init() is omitted, but a >> XEN_DOMCTL_unbind_pt_irq >> hypercall still calls into msixtbl_pt_unregister(). This follows the linked >> list pointer which is still NULL. >> Introduce an is-initalised check to msixtbl_pt_unregister(). >> Furthermore, the purpose of the open-coded msixtbl_list.next check is rather >> subtle. Introduce an msixtbl_initialised() predicate instead, which makes >> its >> purpose far more obvious. >> Reported-by: Sander Eikelenboom <li...@eikelenboom.it> >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> >> --- >> CC: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> >> CC: Sander Eikelenboom <li...@eikelenboom.it> >> Sander - would you mind double checking this patch? >> --- > Hi Andrew, > > Just got the chance to test and it works for me ! > > Thanks,
May I take that as a Test-by: then please? ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
