[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1502903940.2042.157.camel@hpe.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 17:28:50 +0000
From: "Kani, Toshimitsu" <toshi.kani@....com>
To: "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"mchehab@...nel.org" <mchehab@...nel.org>,
"rjw@...ysocki.net" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
"tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"lenb@...nel.org" <lenb@...nel.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] ghes_edac: avoid multiple calls to dmi_walk()
On Wed, 2017-08-16 at 18:42 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 03:26:04PM +0000, Kani, Toshimitsu wrote:
> > I believe you now need to protect from a race condition that a
> > single mci and pvt can be initialized / consumed from multiple
> > threads. This protection is missing in your patch.
>
> Easy. Done.
Assuming this big spinlock works, yes, this addresses my concern that
it does not allow concurrent accesses to mci. :-)
I will test the patch with an SCI when I got a chance. I won't be able
to test other notification types or race conditions, though.
Thanks,
-Toshi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists