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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).