Re: [PATCH 2/5] swiotlb: Add is_swiotlb_active() function

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 04:00:00PM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 09:41:07AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 09:29:23AM +0100, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > > > As I've just introduced and fixed a bug in this area in the current
> > > > cycle - I don't think no_iotlb_memory is what your want (and maybe
> > > > not useful at all): if the arch valls swiotlb_exit after previously
> > > > initializing a buffer it won't be set.  You probably want to check
> > > > for non-zero io_tlb_start and/or io_tlb_end.
> > > 
> > > Okay, but that requires that I also set io_tlb_start and friends back to
> > > zero in the failure path of swiotlb_init(). Otherwise it could be left
> > > non-zero in case swiotlb_init_with_tbl() returns an error.
> > 
> > Indeed, and we'll need to do that anyway as otherwise the dma mapping
> > path might cause problems similar to the one when swiotlb_exit is
> > called that I fixed.
> 
> Turns out the the error path in swiotlb_init() is redundant because it
> will never be executed. If the function returns it will always return 0
> because in case of failure it will just panic (through memblock_alloc).
> 
> I'll clean that up in a separate patch-set. There are more users of that
> function and all of them panic when the function fails.
> 
> 
> 	Joerg

OK so are you going to post a new version then? Time's running out for 5.0.
This isn't a regression so maybe we should just defer it all to 5.1.

-- 
MST