[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <72c440bf-8fc9-8371-3229-bee0aa02c65f@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2022 23:51:06 +0800
From: Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Karsten Graul <kgraul@...ux.ibm.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
kuba@...nel.org
Cc: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/3] net/smc: Resolve the race between link group
access and termination
On 2022/1/11 11:46 pm, Karsten Graul wrote:
> On 11/01/2022 16:36, Wen Gu wrote:
>> Thanks for your review.
>>
>> On 2022/1/11 4:23 pm, Karsten Graul wrote:
>>> On 10/01/2022 10:26, Wen Gu wrote:
>>>> We encountered some crashes caused by the race between the access
>>>> and the termination of link groups.
>>>>
>>>
>>> These waiters (seaparate ones for smcd and smcr) are used to wait for all lgrs
>>> to be deleted when a module unload or reboot was triggered, so it must only be
>>> woken up when the lgr is actually freed.
>>
>> Thanks for your reminding, I will move the wake-up code to __smc_lgr_free().
>>
>> And maybe the vlan put and device put of smcd are also need to be moved
>> to __smc_lgr_free()?, because it also seems to be more suitable to put these
>> resources when lgr is actually freed. What do you think?
>
> Keep the calls to smc_ism_put_vlan() and put_device() in smc_lgr_free(),
> thats okay for SMC-D.
OK.
Thanks,
Wen Gu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists