From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
"will@kernel.org" <will@kernel.org>,
"aneesh.kumar@kernel.org" <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>,
"iommu@lists.linux.dev" <iommu@lists.linux.dev>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"joro@8bytes.org" <joro@8bytes.org>,
"robin.murphy@arm.com" <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
"shuah@kernel.org" <shuah@kernel.org>,
"nicolinc@nvidia.com" <nicolinc@nvidia.com>,
"aik@amd.com" <aik@amd.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
"baolu.lu@linux.intel.com" <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>,
"Xu, Yilun" <yilun.xu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/5] iommufd: Destroy vdevice on idevice destroy
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 11:50:51 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250630145051.GY167785@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aGJkitx6wjfQ888t@yilunxu-OptiPlex-7050>
On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 06:18:50PM +0800, Xu Yilun wrote:
> I need to reconsider this, seems we need a dedicated vdev lock to
> synchronize concurrent vdev abort/destroy.
It is not possible to be concurrent
destroy is only called once after it is no longer possible to call
abort.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-30 14:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-27 3:38 [PATCH v3 0/5] iommufd: Destroy vdevice on device unbind Xu Yilun
2025-06-27 3:38 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] iommufd: Add iommufd_object_tombstone_user() helper Xu Yilun
2025-06-30 3:08 ` Baolu Lu
2025-06-30 7:24 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-30 5:52 ` Tian, Kevin
2025-06-30 6:41 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-30 19:50 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-08 8:45 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-27 3:38 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] iommufd: Destroy vdevice on idevice destroy Xu Yilun
2025-06-30 5:08 ` Baolu Lu
2025-07-08 8:34 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-30 6:27 ` Tian, Kevin
2025-06-30 10:18 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-30 14:50 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2025-07-01 9:19 ` Xu Yilun
2025-07-01 12:13 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-02 2:23 ` Xu Yilun
2025-07-02 9:13 ` Tian, Kevin
2025-07-02 12:40 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-03 4:32 ` Tian, Kevin
2025-07-03 11:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-07 10:58 ` Xu Yilun
2025-07-07 12:25 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-07-07 19:41 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-30 19:34 ` Nicolin Chen
2025-07-08 8:12 ` Xu Yilun
2025-06-27 3:38 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] iommufd/vdevice: Remove struct device reference from struct vdevice Xu Yilun
2025-06-30 5:11 ` Baolu Lu
2025-07-04 15:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-27 3:38 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] iommufd/selftest: Explicitly skip tests for inapplicable variant Xu Yilun
2025-07-04 15:07 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-27 3:38 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] iommufd/selftest: Add coverage for vdevice tombstone Xu Yilun
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=20250630145051.GY167785@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=aik@amd.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
--cc=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolinc@nvidia.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yilun.xu@intel.com \
--cc=yilun.xu@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.