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]
Message-ID: <BYAPR21MB12711CF66BB8A61FA4A46F05CE459@BYAPR21MB1271.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
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?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ