On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:30:57AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 05:14:33PM +0800, Asias He wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:19:00AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 09:14:07AM +0800, Asias He wrote:
> > > > Currently, vs->vs_endpoint
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 05:14:33PM +0800, Asias He wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:19:00AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 09:14:07AM +0800, Asias He wrote:
> > > Currently, vs->vs_endpoint is used indicate if the endpoint is setup or
> > > not. It is set or cleared
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 10:19:00AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 09:14:07AM +0800, Asias He wrote:
> > Currently, vs->vs_endpoint is used indicate if the endpoint is setup or
> > not. It is set or cleared in vhost_scsi_set_endpoint() or
> > vhost_scsi_clear_endpoint() u
On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 09:14:07AM +0800, Asias He wrote:
> Currently, vs->vs_endpoint is used indicate if the endpoint is setup or
> not. It is set or cleared in vhost_scsi_set_endpoint() or
> vhost_scsi_clear_endpoint() under the vs->dev.mutex lock. However, when
> we check it in vhost_scsi_handl
Currently, vs->vs_endpoint is used indicate if the endpoint is setup or
not. It is set or cleared in vhost_scsi_set_endpoint() or
vhost_scsi_clear_endpoint() under the vs->dev.mutex lock. However, when
we check it in vhost_scsi_handle_vq(), we ignored the lock, this is
wrong.
Instead of using the