On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 22:04:18 -0300
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 11:07:35AM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > @@ -2281,15 +2143,13 @@ static int vfio_pci_try_zap_and_vma_lock_cb(struct pci_dev *pdev, void *data)
> >
> > vdev = container_of(device, struct vfio_pci_device, vdev);
> >
> > - /*
> > - * Locking multiple devices is prone to deadlock, runaway and
> > - * unwind if we hit contention.
> > - */
> > - if (!vfio_pci_zap_and_vma_lock(vdev, true)) {
> > + if (!down_write_trylock(&vdev->memory_lock)) {
> > vfio_device_put(device);
> > return -EBUSY;
> > }
>
> Now that this is simplified so much, I wonder if we can drop the
> memory_lock and just use the dev_set->lock?
>
> That avoids the whole down_write_trylock thing and makes it much more
> understandable?
Hmm, that would make this case a lot easier, but using a mutex,
potentially shared across multiple devices, taken on every non-mmap
read/write doesn't really feel like a good trade-off when we're
currently using a per device rwsem to retain concurrency here. Thanks,
Alex
