From e8f90717ed3b58e81c480b3aa38e641c0da5a456 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nicolin Chen Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2022 19:02:47 -0700 Subject: vfio: Make vfio_unpin_pages() return void There's only one caller that checks its return value with a WARN_ON_ONCE, while all other callers don't check the return value at all. Above that, an undo function should not fail. So, simplify the API to return void by embedding similar WARN_ONs. Also for users to pinpoint which condition fails, separate WARN_ON lines, yet remove the "driver->ops->unpin_pages" check, since it's unreasonable for callers to unpin on something totally random that wasn't even pinned. And remove NULL pointer checks for they would trigger oops vs. warnings. Note that npage is already validated in the vfio core, thus drop the same check in the type1 code. Suggested-by: Christoph Hellwig Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe Reviewed-by: Kirti Wankhede Tested-by: Terrence Xu Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220723020256.30081-2-nicolinc@nvidia.com Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson --- include/linux/vfio.h | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'include/linux/vfio.h') diff --git a/include/linux/vfio.h b/include/linux/vfio.h index 19cefbaa3d06..9f7d74c24925 100644 --- a/include/linux/vfio.h +++ b/include/linux/vfio.h @@ -163,8 +163,8 @@ bool vfio_file_has_dev(struct file *file, struct vfio_device *device); int vfio_pin_pages(struct vfio_device *device, unsigned long *user_pfn, int npage, int prot, unsigned long *phys_pfn); -int vfio_unpin_pages(struct vfio_device *device, unsigned long *user_pfn, - int npage); +void vfio_unpin_pages(struct vfio_device *device, unsigned long *user_pfn, + int npage); int vfio_dma_rw(struct vfio_device *device, dma_addr_t user_iova, void *data, size_t len, bool write); -- cgit v1.2.3