[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a170e0ec-f0cf-e23f-0ca7-e8a5bfd1cf31@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2021 14:47:21 +0800
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To: Xie Yongji <xieyongji@...edance.com>, mst@...hat.com,
stefanha@...hat.com, sgarzare@...hat.com, parav@...dia.com,
bob.liu@...cle.com, hch@...radead.org, rdunlap@...radead.org,
willy@...radead.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, axboe@...nel.dk,
bcrl@...ck.org, corbet@....net
Cc: virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-aio@...ck.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v4 02/11] vhost-vdpa: protect concurrent access to vhost
device iotlb
On 2021/2/23 7:50 下午, Xie Yongji wrote:
> Use vhost_dev->mutex to protect vhost device iotlb from
> concurrent access.
>
> Fixes: 4c8cf318("vhost: introduce vDPA-based backend")
> Signed-off-by: Xie Yongji <xieyongji@...edance.com>
> ---
> drivers/vhost/vdpa.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c b/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> index c50079dfb281..5500e3bf05c1 100644
> --- a/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vdpa.c
> @@ -723,6 +723,7 @@ static int vhost_vdpa_process_iotlb_msg(struct vhost_dev *dev,
> if (r)
> return r;
>
> + mutex_lock(&dev->mutex);
I think this should be done before the vhost_dev_check_owner() above.
Thanks
> switch (msg->type) {
> case VHOST_IOTLB_UPDATE:
> r = vhost_vdpa_process_iotlb_update(v, msg);
> @@ -742,6 +743,7 @@ static int vhost_vdpa_process_iotlb_msg(struct vhost_dev *dev,
> r = -EINVAL;
> break;
> }
> + mutex_unlock(&dev->mutex);
>
> return r;
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists