[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1340237254.28143.201.camel@pasglop>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 10:07:34 +1000
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc: joerg.roedel@....com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
aik@...abs.ru, david@...son.dropbear.id.au, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, ddutile@...hat.com, liuj97@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] iommu: IOMMU Groups
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 10:48 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> Yes, I was assuming the caller held a reference to the struct device to
> prevent such a race, looks like I forgot to document that in the
> comments. I'll have to think about if we can fix the ordering problem.
> We can re-order the list_add vs notification, but then we just risk
> dropping the remove. Perhaps we need to extend the lock or add another
> to group {list add, notify add}, {list lookup, remove, notify remove}.
> I'm not even sure this race is possible though w/ a device reference.
Or we put the burden on the callers not to racily add & remove,
including full completion of related notifiers. Might not even be hard
(ie might already be the case).
Cheers,
Ben.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists