linux-kernel - RE: [Patch v2 2/2] PCI: hv: Remove unused refcount and supporting functions for handling bus device removal

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 23 Apr 2021 18:40:12 +0000
From:   Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>
To:     Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
        "longli@...uxonhyperv.com" <longli@...uxonhyperv.com>,
        KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@...rosoft.com>,
        Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        "linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [Patch v2 2/2] PCI: hv: Remove unused refcount and supporting
 functions for handling bus device removal

> Subject: RE: [Patch v2 2/2] PCI: hv: Remove unused refcount and supporting
> functions for handling bus device removal
> 
> > From: longli@...uxonhyperv.com <longli@...uxonhyperv.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2021 10:46 PM
> >
> > With the new method of flushing/stopping the workqueue before doing
> > bus removal, the old mechanisum of using refcount and wait for
> > completion
> 
> mechanisum -> mechanism
> 
> > is no longer needed. Remove those dead code.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>
> > ---
> 
> The patch looks good to me. BTW, can we also remove get_pcichild() and
> put_pcichild() in an extra patch? I suspect we don't really need those either.

Those two functions are for protecting accessing to the devices on the hbus. There are interactions from PCI layer that need guarantee from hbus that the device is present at the time of access.

Why do you think we don't' need those?