On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 02:09:45PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:56:19PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > During the review of "[PATCH] vsock/virtio: Initialize core virtio vsock > > before registering the driver", Stefan pointed out some possible issues > > in the .probe() and .remove() callbacks of the virtio-vsock driver. > > > > This series tries to solve these issues: > > - Patch 1 postpones the 'the_virtio_vsock' assignment at the end of the > > .probe() to avoid that some sockets queue works when the initialization > > is not finished. > > - Patches 2 and 3 stop workers before to call vdev->config->reset(vdev) to > > be sure that no one is accessing the device, and adds another flush at the > > end of the .remove() to avoid use after free. > > - Patch 4 free also used buffers in the virtqueues during the .remove(). > > > > Stefano Garzarella (4): > > vsock/virtio: fix locking around 'the_virtio_vsock' > > vsock/virtio: stop workers during the .remove() > > vsock/virtio: fix flush of works during the .remove() > > vsock/virtio: free used buffers during the .remove() > > > > net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 105 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 90 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > Looking forward to v2. I took a look at the discussion and I'll review > v2 from scratch. Just keep in mind that the mutex is used more for > mutual exclusion of the init/exit code than to protect the_virtio_vsock, > so we'll still need protection of init/exit code even with RCU. Thanks for the advice! I'll send the v2 ASAP. Thanks, Stefano _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
