[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1cf77005-1825-0d34-6d34-e1b513c28113@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 13:03:47 +0100
From: Karsten Graul <kgraul@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
kuba@...nel.org
Cc: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dust.li@...ux.alibaba.com,
tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net v2 1/2] net/smc: Resolve the race between link
group access and termination
On 05/01/2022 09:27, Wen Gu wrote:
> On 2022/1/3 6:36 pm, Karsten Graul wrote:
>> On 31/12/2021 10:44, Wen Gu wrote:
>>> On 2021/12/29 8:56 pm, Karsten Graul wrote:
>>>> On 28/12/2021 16:13, Wen Gu wrote:
>>>>> We encountered some crashes caused by the race between the access
>>>>> and the termination of link groups.
> So I think checking conn->alert_token_local has the same effect with checking conn->lgr to
> identify whether the link group pointed by conn->lgr is still healthy and able to be used.
Yeah that sounds like a good solution for that! So is it now guaranteed that conn->lgr is always
set and this check can really be removed completely, or should there be a new helper that checks
conn->lgr and the alert_token, like smc_lgr_valid() ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists