Re: [PATCHv6 2/5] gnttab: introduce per-active entry locks

[David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>]

On 23/04/15 13:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
>> @@ -3130,7 +3167,9 @@ grant_table_destroy(
>>  
>>      if ( t == NULL )
>>          return;
>> -    
>> +
>> +    spin_lock(&t->lock);
>> +
>>      for ( i = 0; i < nr_grant_frames(t); i++ )
>>          free_xenheap_page(t->shared_raw[i]);
>>      xfree(t->shared_raw);
>> @@ -3147,6 +3186,8 @@ grant_table_destroy(
>>          free_xenheap_page(t->status[i]);
>>      xfree(t->status);
>>  
>> +    spin_unlock(&t->lock);
> 
> Iirc I asked this before - do you really think these are needed? Because
> again - if they are, that would seem to be a separate bug fix.

It looks unnecessary to me.  Unless Matt can explain why he added it,
I'll drop it.

David