On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 19:52:25 -0800 Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > Jakub Kicinski [k...@kernel.org] wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Jan 2021 23:12:34 -0800 Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: > > > Use a separate lock to serialze ibmvnic_reset() and ibmvnic_remove() > > > functions. ibmvnic_reset() schedules work for the worker thread and > > > ibmvnic_remove() flushes the work before removing the adapter. We > > > don't want any work to be scheduled once we start removing the > > > adapter (i.e after we have already flushed the work). > > > > Locking based on functions, not on data being accessed is questionable > > IMO. If you don't want work to be scheduled isn't it enough to have a > > bit / flag that you set to let other flows know not to schedule reset? > > Maybe I could improve the description, but the "data" being protected > is the work queue. Basically don't add to the work queue while/after > it is (being) flushed. > > Existing code is checking for the VNIC_REMOVING state before scheduling > the work but without a lock. If state goes to REMOVING after we check, > we could schedule work after the flush?
I see, and you can't just use the state_lock because it has to be a spin_lock? If that's the case please just update the commit message and comments to describe the data protected.
