On 15.02.2023 00:38, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
> Stefano Stabellini writes:
>> On Wed, 31 Aug 2022, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
>> 1) iommu.c:reassign_device_ownership and pci_amd_iommu.c:reassign_device
>> Both functions without any pdevs_lock locking do:
>> list_move(>domain_list, >pdev_list);
>>
Hello Stefano,
Stefano Stabellini writes:
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2022, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
>> domain->pdevs_lock protects access to domain->pdev_list.
>> As this, it should be used when we are adding, removing on enumerating
>> PCI devices assigned to a domain.
>>
>> This enables more
On 27.01.2023 00:18, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2022, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
>> @@ -1571,6 +1595,7 @@ static int iommu_get_device_group(
>> if ( sdev_id < 0 )
>> {
>> pcidevs_unlock();
>> +spin_unlock(>pdevs_lock);
>
> lock inversion
>
On Wed, 31 Aug 2022, Volodymyr Babchuk wrote:
> domain->pdevs_lock protects access to domain->pdev_list.
> As this, it should be used when we are adding, removing on enumerating
> PCI devices assigned to a domain.
>
> This enables more granular locking instead of one huge pcidevs_lock that
>
domain->pdevs_lock protects access to domain->pdev_list.
As this, it should be used when we are adding, removing on enumerating
PCI devices assigned to a domain.
This enables more granular locking instead of one huge pcidevs_lock that
locks entire PCI subsystem. Please note that pcidevs_lock() is
