lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Mar]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRE: [PATCH 6/8] vfio/mdev: Follow correct remove sequence
    Date


    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
    > Sent: Monday, March 25, 2019 3:21 PM
    > To: Parav Pandit <parav@mellanox.com>
    > Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
    > kwankhede@nvidia.com
    > Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] vfio/mdev: Follow correct remove sequence
    >
    > On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 18:20:33 -0500
    > Parav Pandit <parav@mellanox.com> wrote:
    >
    > > mdev_remove_sysfs_files() should follow exact mirror sequence of a
    > > create, similar to what is followed in error unwinding path of
    > > mdev_create_sysfs_files().
    > >
    > > Fixes: 7b96953bc640 ("vfio: Mediated device Core driver")
    > > Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit <parav@mellanox.com>
    > > ---
    > > drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_sysfs.c | 2 +-
    > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
    > >
    > > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_sysfs.c
    > > b/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_sysfs.c index ce5dd21..c782fa9 100644
    > > --- a/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_sysfs.c
    > > +++ b/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_sysfs.c
    > > @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ int mdev_create_sysfs_files(struct device *dev,
    > > struct mdev_type *type)
    > >
    > > void mdev_remove_sysfs_files(struct device *dev, struct mdev_type
    > > *type) {
    > > + sysfs_remove_files(&dev->kobj, mdev_device_attrs);
    > > sysfs_remove_link(&dev->kobj, "mdev_type");
    > > sysfs_remove_link(type->devices_kobj, dev_name(dev));
    > > - sysfs_remove_files(&dev->kobj, mdev_device_attrs);
    > > }
    >
    > Ok, I agree this is good practice, but what qualifies a "Fixes:" tag here? The
    > fixes reference is incorrect in any case, 6a62c1dfb5c7 changed the creation
    > ordering and didn't update the remove ordering to match, but I still don't
    > see an actual problem with the remove ordering that necessitates the tag.
    > Please clarify. Thanks,
    >
    In netdev and rdma subsystem we always follow Fixes tag line whenever there is fix, small or big.
    So following good practice is better.
    I will fix the tag number in v1.

    > Alex

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2019-03-25 22:32    [W:4.226 / U:0.128 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site