> On 8 Mar 2022, at 19:46, Vikram Garhwal <fnu.vik...@xilinx.com> wrote:
>
> Rename iommu_dt_device_is_assigned() to iommu_dt_device_is_assigned_lock().
>
> Moving spin_lock to caller was done to prevent the concurrent access to
> iommu_dt_device_is_assigned while doing add/remove/assign/deassign.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vikram Garhwal <fnu.vik...@xilinx.com>
> ---
> xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c | 11 +++++++----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c
> b/xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c
> index 98f2aa0dad..b3b04f8e03 100644
> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c
> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/device_tree.c
> @@ -83,16 +83,14 @@ fail:
> return rc;
> }
>
> -static bool_t iommu_dt_device_is_assigned(const struct dt_device_node *dev)
> +static bool_t iommu_dt_device_is_assigned_lock(const struct dt_device_node
> *dev)
> {
> bool_t assigned = 0;
>
You can add an ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&dtdevs_lock)); to be sure, however the
name is pretty clear,
so for me with or without it:
Reviewed-by: Luca Fancellu <luca.fance...@arm.com>
> if ( !dt_device_is_protected(dev) )
> return 0;
>
> - spin_lock(&dtdevs_lock);
> assigned = !list_empty(&dev->domain_list);
> - spin_unlock(&dtdevs_lock);
>
> return assigned;
> }
> @@ -225,12 +223,17 @@ int iommu_do_dt_domctl(struct xen_domctl *domctl,
> struct domain *d,
>
> if ( domctl->cmd == XEN_DOMCTL_test_assign_device )
> {
> - if ( iommu_dt_device_is_assigned(dev) )
> + spin_lock(&dtdevs_lock);
> +
> + if ( iommu_dt_device_is_assigned_lock(dev) )
> {
> printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "%s already assigned.\n",
> dt_node_full_name(dev));
> ret = -EINVAL;
> }
> +
> + spin_unlock(&dtdevs_lock);
> +
> break;
> }
>
>
