Hi Peter,
On 3/8/21 5:37 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 at 09:15, Eric Auger <eric.au...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> If the asid is not set, do not attempt to locate the key directly
>> as all inserted keys have a valid asid.
>>
>> Use g_hash_table_foreach_remove instead.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.au...@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> hw/arm/smmu-common.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/arm/smmu-common.c b/hw/arm/smmu-common.c
>> index 405d5c5325..e9ca3aebb2 100644
>> --- a/hw/arm/smmu-common.c
>> +++ b/hw/arm/smmu-common.c
>> @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ inline void
>> smmu_iotlb_inv_iova(SMMUState *s, int asid, dma_addr_t iova,
>> uint8_t tg, uint64_t num_pages, uint8_t ttl)
>> {
>> - if (ttl && (num_pages == 1)) {
>> + if (ttl && (num_pages == 1) && (asid >= 0)) {
>> SMMUIOTLBKey key = smmu_get_iotlb_key(asid, iova, tg, ttl);
>>
>> g_hash_table_remove(s->iotlb, &key);
>
> Do we also need to avoid the remove-by-key codepath if
> the tg is not set ?
when TG is not set, TTL is res0 so I think it is safe.
Thanks
Eric
>
> thanks
> -- PMM
>
