Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/15] s390/vfio-ap: implement in-use callback for
 vfio_ap driver
To:     Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Cc:     linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kvm@vger.kernel.org, freude@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com,
        mjrosato@linux.ibm.com, pmorel@linux.ibm.com, pasic@linux.ibm.com,
        alex.williamson@redhat.com, kwankhede@nvidia.com,
        jjherne@linux.ibm.com, fiuczy@linux.ibm.com
References: <20200407192015.19887-1-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>
 <20200407192015.19887-5-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>
 <20200416131845.3ef6b3b5.cohuck@redhat.com>
From:   Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <5cf7d611-e30c-226d-0d3d-d37170f117f4@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 10:45:20 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200416131845.3ef6b3b5.cohuck@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 4/16/20 7:18 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> On Tue,  7 Apr 2020 15:20:04 -0400
> Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Let's implement the callback to indicate when an APQN
>> is in use by the vfio_ap device driver. The callback is
>> invoked whenever a change to the apmask or aqmask would
>> result in one or more queue devices being removed from the driver. The
>> vfio_ap device driver will indicate a resource is in use
>> if the APQN of any of the queue devices to be removed are assigned to
>> any of the matrix mdevs under the driver's control.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_drv.c     |  1 +
>>   drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_ops.c     | 47 +++++++++++++++++----------
>>   drivers/s390/crypto/vfio_ap_private.h |  2 ++
>>   3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>> @@ -1369,3 +1371,14 @@ void vfio_ap_mdev_remove_queue(struct ap_queue *queue)
>>   	kfree(q);
>>   	mutex_unlock(&matrix_dev->lock);
>>   }
>> +
>> +bool vfio_ap_mdev_resource_in_use(unsigned long *apm, unsigned long *aqm)
>> +{
>> +	bool in_use;
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&matrix_dev->lock);
>> +	in_use = vfio_ap_mdev_verify_no_sharing(NULL, apm, aqm) ? true : false;
> Maybe
>
> in_use = !!vfio_ap_mdev_verify_no_sharing(NULL, apm, aqm);
>
> ?

To be honest, I find the !! expression very confusing. Every time I see 
it, I have
to spend time thinking about what the result of !! is going to be. I think
the statement should be left as-is because it more clearly expresses
the intent.

>
>> +	mutex_unlock(&matrix_dev->lock);
>> +
>> +	return in_use;
>> +}