[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87sj8l2cea.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2012 10:28:53 +1030
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: sjur.brandeland@...ricsson.com, Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, sjur@...ndeland.net,
Sjur Brændeland <sjur.brandeland@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH resend] virtio_console: Free buffers from out-queue upon close
sjur.brandeland@...ricsson.com writes:
> From: Sjur Brændeland <sjur.brandeland@...ricsson.com>
>
> Free pending output buffers from the virtio out-queue when
> host has acknowledged port_close. Also removed WARN_ON()
> in remove_port_data().
>
> Signed-off-by: Sjur Brændeland <sjur.brandeland@...ricsson.com>
> ---
>
> Resending, this time including a proper "Subject"...
> --
>
> Hi Amit,
>
> Note: This patch is compile tested only. I have done the removal
> of buffers from out-queue in handle_control_message()
> when host has acked the close request. This seems less
> racy than doing it in the release function.
This confuses me... why are we doing this in case
VIRTIO_CONSOLE_PORT_OPEN:?
We can't pull unconsumed buffers out of the ring when the other side may
still access it, and this seems to be doing that.
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
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