Hi Yury,
On 29.09.17 01:14, Yury Norov wrote:
Hi Volodymyr,
On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 09:04:01PM +0300, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
From: Volodymyr Babchuk vlad.babchuk@gmail.com
In order to register a shared buffer in TEE, we need accessor function that return list of pages for that buffer.
Signed-off-by: Volodymyr Babchuk vlad.babchuk@gmail.com
include/linux/tee_drv.h | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/linux/tee_drv.h b/include/linux/tee_drv.h index 6ba8b76..d773827 100644 --- a/include/linux/tee_drv.h +++ b/include/linux/tee_drv.h @@ -394,6 +394,20 @@ static inline size_t tee_shm_get_size(struct tee_shm *shm) } /**
- tee_shm_get_pages() - Get list of pages that hold shared buffer
- @shm: Shared memory handle
- @num_pages: Number of pages will be stored there
- @returns pointer to pages array
- */
+static inline struct page **tee_shm_get_pages(struct tee_shm *shm,
size_t *num_pages)+{
- if (num_pages)
*num_pages = shm->num_pages;My concern is about this check
The only use of the tee_shm_get_pages() I found is in patch #9:
size_t page_num;pages = tee_shm_get_pages(shm, &page_num);So there's no any valid scenario where you should pass NULL to the function. And I don't understand why you do this check.
Even more, if in future there will be an occasion when function will be passed with NULL, the error will become hidden by this code.
Yes, I think you are right. I added that check in case someone want to get only pointer to pages. But this is semantically invalid. I'll remove that check. Thank you for review.