linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] s390/vfio-ap: do not open code locks for VFIO_GROUP_NOTIFY_SET

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:   Wed, 18 Aug 2021 18:50:47 +0200
From:   Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
To:     Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc:     Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cohuck@...hat.com,
        pasic@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, jjherne@...ux.ibm.com, jgg@...dia.com,
        kwankhede@...dia.com, david@...hat.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        frankja@...ux.ibm.com, imbrenda@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] s390/vfio-ap: do not open code locks for
 VFIO_GROUP_NOTIFY_SET_KVM notification



On 18.08.21 18:39, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2021 17:59:51 +0200
> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 02.08.21 18:32, Tony Krowiak wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/2/21 9:53 AM, Halil Pasic wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 09:10:26 -0400
>>>> Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>>   
>>>>> PING!
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch will pre-req version 17 of a patch series I have waiting in
>>>>> the wings,
>>>>> so I'd like to get this one merged ASAP. In particular, if a KVM
>>>>> maintainer can
>>>>> take a look at the comments concerning the taking of the kvm->lock
>>>>> before the
>>>>> matrix_mdev->lock it would be greatly appreciated. Those comments begin with
>>>>> Message ID <20210727004329.3bcc7d4f.pasic@...ux.ibm.com> from Halil Pasic.
>>>> As far as I'm concerned, we can move forward with this. Was this
>>>> supposed to go in via Alex's tree?
>>>
>>> I am not certain, Christian queued the previous patches related to
>>> this on:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/s390/linux.git/log/?h=fixes
>>>
>>> Jason G., since this will need to be integrated with your other patches,
>>> where should this be queued?
>>
>>
>> This previous patch (s390/vfio-ap: clean up mdev resources when remove callback invoked) is
>> already in master.
>> Can you respin the series with all Acks and RBs?
>>
>> Alex, can you then take these 2 patches via your tree? Thanks
>>
>> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
>> for this series.
> 
> 
> I see some review feedback that seems to suggest a new version would be
> posted:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-s390/0f03ab0b-2dfd-e1c1-fe43-be2a59030a71@linux.ibm.com/
> 
> I also see in this thread:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-s390/20210721164550.5402fe1c.pasic@linux.ibm.com/
> 
> that Halil's concern's around open/close races are addressed by Jason's
> device_open/close series that's already in my next branch and he
> provided an Ack, but there's still the above question regarding the
> kvm->lock that was looking for a review from... I'm not sure, maybe
> Connie or Paolo.  Christian, is this specifically what you're ack'ing?

My understanding was that Halil was ok in the end?
I will do a review myself then if that helps.
> 
> It can ultimately go in through my tree, but not being familiar with
> this code I'd hope for more closure.  Thanks,
> 
> Alex
>