On Sun, Jun 02, 2019 at 06:03:34PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Stefano Garzarella <sgarz...@redhat.com> > Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 15:39:51 +0200 > > > @@ -434,7 +434,9 @@ void virtio_transport_set_buffer_size(struct vsock_sock > > *vsk, u64 val) > > if (val > vvs->buf_size_max) > > vvs->buf_size_max = val; > > vvs->buf_size = val; > > + spin_lock_bh(&vvs->rx_lock); > > vvs->buf_alloc = val; > > + spin_unlock_bh(&vvs->rx_lock); > > This locking doesn't do anything other than to strongly order the > buf_size store to occur before the buf_alloc one.
Sure, I'll remove the lock. I was confused because I moved its reading under the rx_lock (together with other variables), but here I'm updating only buf_alloc, so this lock is useless. Thanks, Stefano _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
