[PATCH] iommu/amd: Fix alloc_irq_index() increment

[Alex Williamson]

On an is_allocated() interrupt index, we ALIGN() the current index and
then increment it via the for loop, guaranteeing that it is no longer
aligned for alignments >1.  We instead need to align the next index,
to guarantee forward progress, moving the increment-only to the case
where the index was found to be unallocated.

Fixes: 37946d95fc1a ('iommu/amd: Add align parameter to alloc_irq_index()')
Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.william...@redhat.com>
---
 drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c |    7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c
index 9dc7facfd2e5..3c1a29104f0e 100644
--- a/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c
+++ b/drivers/iommu/amd_iommu.c
@@ -3682,13 +3682,12 @@ static int alloc_irq_index(u16 devid, int count, bool 
align)
 
        /* Scan table for free entries */
        for (index = ALIGN(table->min_index, alignment), c = 0;
-            index < MAX_IRQS_PER_TABLE;
-            index++) {
+            index < MAX_IRQS_PER_TABLE;) {
                if (!iommu->irte_ops->is_allocated(table, index)) {
                        c += 1;
                } else {
                        c     = 0;
-                       index = ALIGN(index, alignment);
+                       index = ALIGN(index + 1, alignment);
                        continue;
                }
 
@@ -3699,6 +3698,8 @@ static int alloc_irq_index(u16 devid, int count, bool 
align)
                        index -= count - 1;
                        goto out;
                }
+
+               index++;
        }
 
        index = -ENOSPC;