[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v2] s390x: adapter routes error handling

From: Christian Borntraeger
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] s390x: adapter routes error handling
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2020 12:34:47 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.0

On 17.01.20 12:33, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 12:22:45 +0100
> Christian Borntraeger <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On 17.01.20 12:11, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>>> If the kernel irqchip has been disabled, we don't want the
>>> {add,release}_adapter_routes routines to call any kvm_irqchip_*
>>> interfaces, as they may rely on an irqchip actually having been
>>> created. Just take a quick exit in that case instead.
>>> Also initialize routes->gsi[] with -1 in the virtio-ccw handling,
>>> to make sure we don't trip over other errors, either. (Nobody
>>> else uses the gsi array in that structure.)
>>> Fixes: d426d9fba8ea ("s390x/virtio-ccw: wire up irq routing and irqfds")
>>> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <address@hidden>  
>> I think it was actually quite good to see an error, because something went 
>> wrong
>> (kvmirqchip being off). Now the error (crash) was certainly a bad one.
>> What happens after this patch?
>> To me it _looks_ like every caller of set_guest_notifiers would get the 
>> and bail out with an error so this should be ok, but it would be good
>> to add something to the patch description that says so.
>> Something like "instead of crashing we now fail with an error message for 
>> vhost
>> and friends"
>> of course only if this is true.
> It should work in the same way as it does for tcg right now (we return
> -ENOSYS in the non-kvm flic as well). If you're not using irqfd,
> everything will work just fine.
> What about the following:
> "If you are trying to use irqfd without a kernel irqchip, we will fail
> with an error."

With that
Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <address@hidden>

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]