From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Staging: hv: util: Fix a bug in kvp implementation Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 21:37:17 -0700 Message-ID: <20111005043717.GA3918@suse.de> References: <1317762002-4351-1-git-send-email-kys@microsoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1317762002-4351-1-git-send-email-kys@microsoft.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "K. Y. Srinivasan" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devel@linuxdriverproject.org, virtualization@lists.osdl.org, longli@microsoft.com, Haiyang Zhang List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 02:00:02PM -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote: > The host gurantees that there can be only one kvp transaction active > against the guest. So, the transaction active state is needed only to > protect against spurious user level calls. The current code had a race > condition where the guest could prematurely return because the previous > transaction state was not cleared - this state was being cleared after > sending the response to the host and there was a window where the host > could notify the guest of a new transaction before the transaction active > state was properly set. > Also deal with the case when the user mode component > does not respond in a timely fashion correctly. > I would like to thank Long Li > for identifying the problem. So that would be a "Reported-by:" tag, we don't have a "Diagnosed-by" do we? And should this go to the older (i.e. stable) kernels as well? thanks, greg k-h