On 10/20/2010 11:17 AM, Sheng Yang wrote:
}+int kvm_get_irq_routing_entry(struct kvm *kvm, int gsi, + struct kvm_kernel_irq_routing_entry *entry) +{ + int count = 0; + struct kvm_kernel_irq_routing_entry *ei = NULL; + struct kvm_irq_routing_table *irq_rt; + struct hlist_node *n; + + rcu_read_lock(); + irq_rt = rcu_dereference(kvm->irq_routing); + if (gsi< irq_rt->nr_rt_entries) + hlist_for_each_entry(ei, n,&irq_rt->map[gsi], link) + count++; + rcu_read_unlock(); + if (count == 1) + memcpy(entry, ei, sizeof(*ei));
Need to be before the unlock.
+ + return (count != 1); +} +
"*entry = *ei" is clearer and safer. But is it correct? we might be using outdated data.
-- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
