Hi Juliet,
Juliet Kim <juli...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> Signed-off-by: Juliet Kim <juli...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.h | 3 +++
> 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c
> index ba340aaff1b3..f344ccd68ad9 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmvnic.c
> @@ -2054,6 +2054,13 @@ static void __ibmvnic_reset(struct work_struct *work)
>
> adapter = container_of(work, struct ibmvnic_adapter, ibmvnic_reset);
>
> + if (adapter->resetting) {
> + schedule_delayed_work(&adapter->ibmvnic_delayed_reset,
> + IBMVNIC_RESET_DELAY);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + adapter->resetting = true;
> reset_state = adapter->state;
Is there some locking/serialisation around this?
Otherwise that looks very racy. ie. two CPUs could both see
adapter->resetting == false, then both set it to true, and then continue
executing and stomp on each other.
cheers
