[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/7] iommu: IOMMU Groups
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 10:48 -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:

> Yes, I was assuming the caller held a reference to the struct device to
> prevent such a race, looks like I forgot to document that in the
> comments. I'll have to think about if we can fix the ordering problem.
> We can re-order the list_add vs notification, but then we just risk
> dropping the remove. Perhaps we need to extend the lock or add another
> to group {list add, notify add}, {list lookup, remove, notify remove}.
> I'm not even sure this race is possible though w/ a device reference.

Or we put the burden on the callers not to racily add & remove,
including full completion of related notifiers. Might not even be hard
(ie might already be the case).


 \ /
  Last update: 2012-06-21 02:41    [W:0.056 / U:2.492 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site