From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: George Zhang <georgezhang@vmware.com>
Cc: pv-drivers@vmware.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] VMCI: context implementation.
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 19:10:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121030021058.GB1920@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121030010333.17788.94988.stgit@promb-2n-dhcp175.eng.vmware.com>
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 06:03:42PM -0700, George Zhang wrote:
> +/*
> + * Releases the VMCI context. If this is the last reference to
> + * the context it will be deallocated. A context is created with
> + * a reference count of one, and on destroy, it is removed from
> + * the context list before its reference count is
> + * decremented. Thus, if we reach zero, we are sure that nobody
> + * else are about to increment it (they need the entry in the
> + * context list for that). This function musn't be called with a
> + * lock held.
> + */
> +void vmci_ctx_release(struct vmci_ctx *context)
> +{
> + ASSERT(context);
> + kref_put(&context->kref, ctx_free_ctx);
> +}
> +
Hm, are you _sure_ you should be calling this without a lock held?
That's usually kref-101, you MUST hold a lock when calling put,
otherwise you can race a kref_get() call, and all hell can break loose.
Because of this, some saner people (like Al Viro), have suggested that I
force the kref_put() and kref_get() calls pass in a spinlock just to
enforce this.
So, tell me what I'm missing here, and why you put the comment here
saying that it really is supposed to be called without a lock held? How
is that safe?
confused,
greg k-h
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: George Zhang <georgezhang@vmware.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, pv-drivers@vmware.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] VMCI: context implementation.
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 19:10:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121030021058.GB1920@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121030010333.17788.94988.stgit@promb-2n-dhcp175.eng.vmware.com>
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 06:03:42PM -0700, George Zhang wrote:
> +/*
> + * Releases the VMCI context. If this is the last reference to
> + * the context it will be deallocated. A context is created with
> + * a reference count of one, and on destroy, it is removed from
> + * the context list before its reference count is
> + * decremented. Thus, if we reach zero, we are sure that nobody
> + * else are about to increment it (they need the entry in the
> + * context list for that). This function musn't be called with a
> + * lock held.
> + */
> +void vmci_ctx_release(struct vmci_ctx *context)
> +{
> + ASSERT(context);
> + kref_put(&context->kref, ctx_free_ctx);
> +}
> +
Hm, are you _sure_ you should be calling this without a lock held?
That's usually kref-101, you MUST hold a lock when calling put,
otherwise you can race a kref_get() call, and all hell can break loose.
Because of this, some saner people (like Al Viro), have suggested that I
force the kref_put() and kref_get() calls pass in a spinlock just to
enforce this.
So, tell me what I'm missing here, and why you put the comment here
saying that it really is supposed to be called without a lock held? How
is that safe?
confused,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-30 2:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-30 1:03 [PATCH 00/12] VMCI for Linux upstreaming George Zhang
2012-10-30 1:03 ` [PATCH 01/12] VMCI: context implementation George Zhang
2012-10-30 2:07 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:07 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:10 ` Greg KH [this message]
2012-10-30 2:10 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 4:01 ` [Pv-drivers] " Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 4:01 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 15:46 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 15:46 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 15:56 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 15:56 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 1:03 ` [PATCH 02/12] VMCI: datagram implementation George Zhang
2012-10-30 1:04 ` [PATCH 03/12] VMCI: doorbell implementation George Zhang
2012-10-30 1:04 ` [PATCH 04/12] VMCI: device driver implementaton George Zhang
2012-10-30 2:21 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:21 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:23 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:23 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 4:15 ` [Pv-drivers] " Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 4:15 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 15:49 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 15:49 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 1:04 ` [PATCH 05/12] VMCI: event handling implementation George Zhang
2012-10-30 2:24 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:24 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 4:58 ` [Pv-drivers] " Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 4:58 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 15:50 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 15:50 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:26 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:26 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 5:01 ` [Pv-drivers] " Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 5:01 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 15:50 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 15:50 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 15:59 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 15:59 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 1:04 ` [PATCH 06/12] VMCI: handle array implementation George Zhang
2012-10-30 1:04 ` [PATCH 07/12] VMCI: queue pairs implementation George Zhang
2012-10-30 1:04 ` [PATCH 08/12] VMCI: resource object implementation George Zhang
2012-10-30 1:04 ` George Zhang
2012-10-30 2:29 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:29 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 5:20 ` [Pv-drivers] " Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 5:20 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 15:51 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 15:51 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 16:11 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 16:11 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 2:29 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:29 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 5:21 ` [Pv-drivers] " Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 5:21 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 1:05 ` [PATCH 09/12] VMCI: routing implementation George Zhang
2012-10-30 1:05 ` George Zhang
2012-10-30 1:05 ` [PATCH 10/12] VMCI: guest side driver implementation George Zhang
2012-10-30 1:05 ` [PATCH 11/12] VMCI: host " George Zhang
2012-10-30 1:05 ` [PATCH 12/12] VMCI: Some header and config files George Zhang
2012-10-30 2:32 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:32 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 5:22 ` [Pv-drivers] " Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 5:22 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 2:38 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:38 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:19 ` [PATCH 00/12] VMCI for Linux upstreaming Greg KH
2012-10-30 2:19 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 4:07 ` [Pv-drivers] " Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 4:07 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 15:48 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 15:48 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 16:18 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 16:18 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 16:27 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 16:27 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 19:43 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 19:43 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2012-10-30 19:59 ` Greg KH
2012-10-30 19:59 ` Greg KH
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-11-01 17:28 George Zhang
2012-11-01 17:28 ` [PATCH 01/12] VMCI: context implementation George Zhang
2012-11-07 18:40 [PATCH 00/12] VMCI for Linux upstreaming George Zhang
2012-11-07 18:41 ` [PATCH 01/12] VMCI: context implementation George Zhang
2012-11-21 20:31 [PATCH 00/12] VMCI for Linux upstreaming George Zhang
2012-11-21 20:31 ` [PATCH 01/12] VMCI: context implementation George Zhang
2012-11-21 21:04 ` Joe Perches
2012-11-21 21:04 ` Joe Perches
2013-01-08 23:52 [PATCH 00/12] VMCI for Linux upstreaming George Zhang
2013-01-08 23:52 ` [PATCH 01/12] VMCI: context implementation George Zhang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20121030021058.GB1920@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=georgezhang@vmware.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pv-drivers@vmware.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.