linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] virtio: use virtio_device_ready() in virtio_device

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: <81381018-9dcd-3fba-becf-183435a5bf6b@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 25 Mar 2022 11:05:22 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:     virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, maz@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        peterz@...radead.org, keirf@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] virtio: use virtio_device_ready() in
 virtio_device_restore()


在 2022/3/24 下午7:31, Stefano Garzarella 写道:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 07:07:09AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 12:03:07PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 06:48:05AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> > On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 04:40:02PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> > > From: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
>>> > >
>>> > > This avoids setting DRIVER_OK twice for those drivers that call
>>> > > virtio_device_ready() in the .restore
>>> >
>>> > Is this trying to say it's faster?
>>>
>>> Nope, I mean, when I wrote the original version, I meant to do the same
>>> things that we do in virtio_dev_probe() where we called
>>> virtio_device_ready() which not only set the state, but also called
>>> .enable_cbs callback.
>>>
>>> Was this a side effect and maybe more compliant with the spec?
>>
>>
>> Sorry I don't understand the question. it says "avoids setting 
>> DRIVER_OK twice" -
>> why is that advantageous and worth calling out in the commit log?
>
> I just wanted to say that it seems strange to set DRIVER_OK twice if 
> we read the spec. I don't think it's wrong, but weird.
>
> Yes, maybe we should rewrite the commit message saying that we want to 
> use virtio_device_ready() everywhere to complete the setup before 
> setting DRIVER_OK so we can do all the necessary operations inside 
> (like in patch 3 or call enable_cbs).
>
> Jason rewrote the commit log, so I don't know if he agrees.
>
> Thanks,
> Stefano


I agree, I will tweak the log in V2.

Thanks