[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190509.135809.630741953977432246.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 13:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: sunilmut@...rosoft.com
Cc: kys@...rosoft.com, haiyangz@...rosoft.com, sthemmin@...rosoft.com,
sashal@...nel.org, decui@...rosoft.com, mikelley@...rosoft.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hv_sock: Fix data loss upon socket close
From: Sunil Muthuswamy <sunilmut@...rosoft.com>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 23:10:35 +0000
> +static inline void hvs_shutdown_lock_held(struct hvsock *hvs, int mode)
Please do not use the inline keyword in foo.c files, let the compiler decide.
Also, longer term thing, I notice that vsock_remove_socket() is very
inefficient locking-wise. It takes the table lock to do the placement
test, and takes it again to do the removal. Might even be racy.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists