On 11.01.2022 16:17, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 01:02:40PM +0200, Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
>> diff --git a/xen/drivers/vpci/vpci.c b/xen/drivers/vpci/vpci.c
>> index 657697fe3406..ceaac4516ff8 100644
>> --- a/xen/drivers/vpci/vpci.c
>> +++ b/xen/drivers/vpci/vpci.c
>> @@ -35,12 +35,10 @@ extern vpci_register_init_t *const __start_vpci_array[];
>> extern vpci_register_init_t *const __end_vpci_array[];
>> #define NUM_VPCI_INIT (__end_vpci_array - __start_vpci_array)
>>
>> -void vpci_remove_device(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> +static void vpci_remove_device_handlers_locked(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> {
>> - if ( !has_vpci(pdev->domain) )
>> - return;
>> + ASSERT(spin_is_locked(&pdev->vpci_lock));
>>
>> - spin_lock(&pdev->vpci->lock);
>> while ( !list_empty(&pdev->vpci->handlers) )
>> {
>> struct vpci_register *r = list_first_entry(&pdev->vpci->handlers,
>> @@ -50,15 +48,33 @@ void vpci_remove_device(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> list_del(&r->node);
>> xfree(r);
>> }
>> - spin_unlock(&pdev->vpci->lock);
>> +}
>> +
>> +void vpci_remove_device_locked(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>
> I think this could be static instead, as it's only used by
> vpci_remove_device and vpci_add_handlers which are local to the
> file.
Does the splitting out of vpci_remove_device_handlers_locked() belong in
this patch in the first place? There's no second caller being added, so
this looks to be an orthogonal adjustment.
Jan
