Re: [PATCH v2 09/30] cxlflash: Fix to stop interrupt processing on remove

2015-09-21 Thread Matthew R. Ochs
> On Sep 21, 2015, at 6:33 AM, Tomas Henzl wrote: > On 19.9.2015 01:26, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: >>> On Sep 18, 2015, at 6:59 AM, Tomas Henzl wrote: >>> On 17.9.2015 19:16, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: > On Sep 17, 2015, at 7:38 AM, Tomas Henzl wrote: > > On 16.9.2015 18:53, Matthew R. Ochs

Re: [PATCH v2 09/30] cxlflash: Fix to stop interrupt processing on remove

2015-09-21 Thread Tomas Henzl
On 19.9.2015 01:26, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: >> On Sep 18, 2015, at 6:59 AM, Tomas Henzl wrote: >> On 17.9.2015 19:16, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: On Sep 17, 2015, at 7:38 AM, Tomas Henzl wrote: On 16.9.2015 18:53, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: > Interrupt processing can run in parallel to a

Re: [PATCH v2 09/30] cxlflash: Fix to stop interrupt processing on remove

2015-09-18 Thread Matthew R. Ochs
> On Sep 18, 2015, at 6:59 AM, Tomas Henzl wrote: > On 17.9.2015 19:16, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: >>> On Sep 17, 2015, at 7:38 AM, Tomas Henzl wrote: >>> >>> On 16.9.2015 18:53, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: Interrupt processing can run in parallel to a remove operation. This can lead to a condi

Re: [PATCH v2 09/30] cxlflash: Fix to stop interrupt processing on remove

2015-09-18 Thread Tomas Henzl
On 17.9.2015 19:16, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: >> On Sep 17, 2015, at 7:38 AM, Tomas Henzl wrote: >> >> On 16.9.2015 18:53, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: >>> Interrupt processing can run in parallel to a remove operation. This >>> can lead to a condition where the interrupt handler is processing with >>> mem

Re: [PATCH v2 09/30] cxlflash: Fix to stop interrupt processing on remove

2015-09-17 Thread Matthew R. Ochs
> On Sep 17, 2015, at 7:38 AM, Tomas Henzl wrote: > > On 16.9.2015 18:53, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: >> Interrupt processing can run in parallel to a remove operation. This >> can lead to a condition where the interrupt handler is processing with >> memory that has been freed. >> >> To avoid process

Re: [PATCH v2 09/30] cxlflash: Fix to stop interrupt processing on remove

2015-09-17 Thread Matthew R. Ochs
> On Sep 17, 2015, at 6:58 AM, David Laight wrote: > > From: Linuxppc-dev Matthew R. Ochs >> Sent: 16 September 2015 22:28 >> Interrupt processing can run in parallel to a remove operation. This >> can lead to a condition where the interrupt handler is processing with >> memory that has been free

Re: [PATCH v2 09/30] cxlflash: Fix to stop interrupt processing on remove

2015-09-17 Thread Tomas Henzl
On 16.9.2015 18:53, Matthew R. Ochs wrote: > Interrupt processing can run in parallel to a remove operation. This > can lead to a condition where the interrupt handler is processing with > memory that has been freed. > > To avoid processing an interrupt while memory may be yanked, check for >

RE: [PATCH v2 09/30] cxlflash: Fix to stop interrupt processing on remove

2015-09-17 Thread David Laight
From: Linuxppc-dev Matthew R. Ochs > Sent: 16 September 2015 22:28 > Interrupt processing can run in parallel to a remove operation. This > can lead to a condition where the interrupt handler is processing with > memory that has been freed. > > To avoid processing an interrupt while memory may be

[PATCH v2 09/30] cxlflash: Fix to stop interrupt processing on remove

2015-09-16 Thread Matthew R. Ochs
Interrupt processing can run in parallel to a remove operation. This can lead to a condition where the interrupt handler is processing with memory that has been freed. To avoid processing an interrupt while memory may be yanked, check for removal while in the interrupt handler. Bail when remov

[PATCH v2 09/30] cxlflash: Fix to stop interrupt processing on remove

2015-09-16 Thread Matthew R. Ochs
Interrupt processing can run in parallel to a remove operation. This can lead to a condition where the interrupt handler is processing with memory that has been freed. To avoid processing an interrupt while memory may be yanked, check for removal while in the interrupt handler. Bail when remov