| Message ID | 20221019162135.798901-7-farman@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | vfio-ccw parent rework | expand |
On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 06:21:34PM +0200, Eric Farman wrote: > /* > * Initialize a vfio_device so it can be registered to vfio core. > - * > - * Only vfio-ccw driver should call this interface. > */ > int vfio_init_device(struct vfio_device *device, struct device *dev, > const struct vfio_device_ops *ops) > @@ -422,7 +420,6 @@ int vfio_init_device(struct vfio_device *device, struct device *dev, > ida_free(&vfio.device_ida, device->index); > return ret; > } > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_init_device); Should be made static as well Jason
On Wed, 2022-10-19 at 14:15 -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 06:21:34PM +0200, Eric Farman wrote: > > > /* > > * Initialize a vfio_device so it can be registered to vfio core. > > - * > > - * Only vfio-ccw driver should call this interface. > > */ > > int vfio_init_device(struct vfio_device *device, struct device > > *dev, > > const struct vfio_device_ops *ops) > > @@ -422,7 +420,6 @@ int vfio_init_device(struct vfio_device > > *device, struct device *dev, > > ida_free(&vfio.device_ida, device->index); > > return ret; > > } > > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_init_device); > > Should be made static as well Agreed. Only reason I didn't was there's a prototype in include/linux/vfio.h to satisfy the call to vfio_init_device from _vfio_alloc_device, and I didn't want to get into moving things around if I didn't need to. I can do that on top, if you'd like. Eric
On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 01:57:41PM -0400, Eric Farman wrote: > On Wed, 2022-10-19 at 14:15 -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 06:21:34PM +0200, Eric Farman wrote: > > > > > /* > > > * Initialize a vfio_device so it can be registered to vfio core. > > > - * > > > - * Only vfio-ccw driver should call this interface. > > > */ > > > int vfio_init_device(struct vfio_device *device, struct device > > > *dev, > > > const struct vfio_device_ops *ops) > > > @@ -422,7 +420,6 @@ int vfio_init_device(struct vfio_device > > > *device, struct device *dev, > > > ida_free(&vfio.device_ida, device->index); > > > return ret; > > > } > > > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_init_device); > > > > Should be made static as well > > Agreed. Only reason I didn't was there's a prototype in > include/linux/vfio.h to satisfy the call to vfio_init_device from > _vfio_alloc_device, and I didn't want to get into moving things around > if I didn't need to. I can do that on top, if you'd like. You can just add a one line forward static declaration at the top of the file in this patch. Jason
> From: Eric Farman > Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2022 12:22 AM > > Now that we have a reasonable separation of structs that follow > the subchannel and mdev lifecycles, there's no reason we can't > call the official vfio_alloc_device routine for our private data, > and behave like everyone else. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com> This looks good to me. With Jason's suggestion handled, Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>
diff --git a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c index 686a9b9f6731..9bbf41315aca 100644 --- a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c +++ b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c @@ -146,35 +146,6 @@ static void vfio_ccw_sch_irq(struct subchannel *sch) vfio_ccw_fsm_event(private, VFIO_CCW_EVENT_INTERRUPT); } -struct vfio_ccw_private *vfio_ccw_alloc_private(struct subchannel *sch) -{ - struct vfio_ccw_private *private; - - private = kzalloc(sizeof(*private), GFP_KERNEL); - if (!private) - return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); - - return private; -} - -void vfio_ccw_free_private(struct vfio_ccw_private *private) -{ - struct vfio_ccw_crw *crw, *temp; - - list_for_each_entry_safe(crw, temp, &private->crw, next) { - list_del(&crw->next); - kfree(crw); - } - - kmem_cache_free(vfio_ccw_crw_region, private->crw_region); - kmem_cache_free(vfio_ccw_schib_region, private->schib_region); - kmem_cache_free(vfio_ccw_cmd_region, private->cmd_region); - kmem_cache_free(vfio_ccw_io_region, private->io_region); - kfree(private->cp.guest_cp); - mutex_destroy(&private->io_mutex); - kfree(private); -} - static void vfio_ccw_free_parent(struct device *dev) { struct vfio_ccw_parent *parent = container_of(dev, struct vfio_ccw_parent, dev); diff --git a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c index 261cb8150abb..9619dc35080f 100644 --- a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c +++ b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c @@ -103,15 +103,10 @@ static int vfio_ccw_mdev_probe(struct mdev_device *mdev) struct vfio_ccw_private *private; int ret; - private = vfio_ccw_alloc_private(sch); - if (!private) - return -ENOMEM; - - ret = vfio_init_device(&private->vdev, &mdev->dev, &vfio_ccw_dev_ops); - if (ret) { - kfree(private); - return ret; - } + private = vfio_alloc_device(vfio_ccw_private, vdev, &mdev->dev, + &vfio_ccw_dev_ops); + if (IS_ERR(private)) + return PTR_ERR(private); dev_set_drvdata(&parent->dev, private); @@ -136,8 +131,21 @@ static void vfio_ccw_mdev_release_dev(struct vfio_device *vdev) { struct vfio_ccw_private *private = container_of(vdev, struct vfio_ccw_private, vdev); + struct vfio_ccw_crw *crw, *temp; + + list_for_each_entry_safe(crw, temp, &private->crw, next) { + list_del(&crw->next); + kfree(crw); + } + + kmem_cache_free(vfio_ccw_crw_region, private->crw_region); + kmem_cache_free(vfio_ccw_schib_region, private->schib_region); + kmem_cache_free(vfio_ccw_cmd_region, private->cmd_region); + kmem_cache_free(vfio_ccw_io_region, private->io_region); + kfree(private->cp.guest_cp); + mutex_destroy(&private->io_mutex); - vfio_ccw_free_private(private); + vfio_free_device(vdev); } static void vfio_ccw_mdev_remove(struct mdev_device *mdev) diff --git a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_private.h b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_private.h index ddaf6846022d..2ca408881659 100644 --- a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_private.h +++ b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_private.h @@ -116,9 +116,6 @@ int vfio_ccw_sch_quiesce(struct subchannel *sch); void vfio_ccw_sch_io_todo(struct work_struct *work); void vfio_ccw_crw_todo(struct work_struct *work); -struct vfio_ccw_private *vfio_ccw_alloc_private(struct subchannel *sch); -void vfio_ccw_free_private(struct vfio_ccw_private *private); - extern struct mdev_driver vfio_ccw_mdev_driver; /* diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c index 2d168793d4e1..28f36c6d9d3f 100644 --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c @@ -386,8 +386,6 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(_vfio_alloc_device); /* * Initialize a vfio_device so it can be registered to vfio core. - * - * Only vfio-ccw driver should call this interface. */ int vfio_init_device(struct vfio_device *device, struct device *dev, const struct vfio_device_ops *ops) @@ -422,7 +420,6 @@ int vfio_init_device(struct vfio_device *device, struct device *dev, ida_free(&vfio.device_ida, device->index); return ret; } -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vfio_init_device); /* * The helper called by driver @release callback to free the device
Now that we have a reasonable separation of structs that follow the subchannel and mdev lifecycles, there's no reason we can't call the official vfio_alloc_device routine for our private data, and behave like everyone else. Signed-off-by: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com> --- drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c | 29 ----------------------------- drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_ops.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++---------- drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_private.h | 3 --- drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c | 3 --- 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)