From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@meta.com>, <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
<bhelgaas@google.com>, <lukas@wunner.de>,
<mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/8] pci: make pci_stop_dev concurrent safe
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 12:01:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240821120144.000035b3@Huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZsSv_KuFfLiwBxZW@kbusch-mbp>
On Tue, 20 Aug 2024 09:02:20 -0600
Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2024 at 03:17:17PM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 08:19:29 -0700
> > Keith Busch <kbusch@meta.com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
> > >
> > > Use the atomic ADDED flag to safely ensure concurrent callers can't
> > > attempt to stop the device multiple times.
> >
> > Maybe mention what concurrent paths exist where this might happen.
>
> I think everyone calling this is holding the pci_rescan_remove_lock, so
> it shouldn't be possible today. This series aims to remove that lock
> though, so this is more of a prep patch for that. But also, the flag is
> already an atomic type, so using those properties makes sense on its own
> too.
Ok. Perhaps mention that it's cleanup / a prep patch rather than a fix.
The current text scared me a bit ;)
Jonathan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-21 11:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-22 15:19 [PATCH RFC 0/8] pci: rescan/remove locking rework Keith Busch
2024-07-22 15:19 ` [PATCH RFC 1/8] pci: make pci_stop_dev concurrent safe Keith Busch
2024-08-15 14:17 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-08-20 15:02 ` Keith Busch
2024-08-21 11:01 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2024-07-22 15:19 ` [PATCH RFC 2/8] pci: make pci_destroy_dev " Keith Busch
2024-08-15 14:18 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-22 15:19 ` [PATCH RFC 3/8] pci: move the walk bus lock to where its needed Keith Busch
2024-08-15 14:20 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-22 15:19 ` [PATCH RFC 4/8] pci: walk bus recursively Keith Busch
2024-08-15 14:33 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-22 15:19 ` [PATCH RFC 5/8] pci: unexport pci_walk_bus_locked Keith Busch
2024-08-15 14:36 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-22 15:19 ` [PATCH RFC 6/8] pci: add helpers for stop and remove bus Keith Busch
2024-08-15 14:49 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-22 15:19 ` [PATCH RFC 7/8] pci: reference count subordinate Keith Busch
2024-08-15 15:10 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-22 15:19 ` [PATCH RFC 8/8] pci: use finer grain locking for bus protection Keith Busch
2024-08-15 15:21 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-08-15 17:05 ` Keith Busch
2024-08-07 15:40 ` [PATCH RFC 0/8] pci: rescan/remove locking rework Keith Busch
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=20240821120144.000035b3@Huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=kbusch@meta.com \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com \
/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.