From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To: Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
"virtualization@lists.linux.dev" <virtualization@lists.linux.dev>,
"stefanha@redhat.com" <stefanha@redhat.com>,
"alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com" <alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] pci: report surprise removal events
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 10:57:35 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aGLB_8SFF1Cw95MZ@kbusch-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CY8PR12MB7195583E429203129577B51ADC46A@CY8PR12MB7195.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 01:52:26PM +0000, Parav Pandit wrote:
> >
> > But I didn't suggest calling error_detected from report_error_detected.
> > Just call it directly without device_lock. It's not very feasible to enforce a non-
> > blocking callback, though, if speed is really a concern here.
> Yeah, it would better to either always call a callback with or without the lock.
> In some flows with lock and in some flows without lock would likely be
> very bad as one cannot establish a sane locking order.
On closer look, my suggestion without the device_lock may be racy, but
using the device_lock prevents the notification that needs to happen.
Hm, not as easy as I thought. :(
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-30 16:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-28 18:58 [PATCH RFC] pci: report surprise removal events Michael S. Tsirkin
2025-06-29 13:36 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-06-29 17:28 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2025-06-29 23:39 ` Keith Busch
2025-06-30 4:07 ` Parav Pandit
2025-06-30 13:44 ` Keith Busch
2025-06-30 13:52 ` Parav Pandit
2025-06-30 16:57 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2025-06-30 17:25 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2025-06-30 7:17 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
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=aGLB_8SFF1Cw95MZ@kbusch-mbp \
--to=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=parav@nvidia.com \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux.dev \
/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.