> On Nov 2, 2016, at 13:11, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On 2016-10-31 16:11:02 [+0000], Trond Myklebust wrote: >> >> Yes, and yes. We can’t rely on the list pointers remaining correct, so we >> restart the list scan and we use the ops->state_flag_bit to signal whether >> or not state has been recovered for the entry being scanned. > > but this is tested at the top of the loop and by then you look at > lists' ->next pointer which might be invalid. >
No. We ensure we restart the list scan if we release the spinlock. It’s safe…
