On 04/05/16 14:38, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 04.05.16 at 15:14, <david.vra...@citrix.com> wrote: >> On 04/05/16 14:08, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> David, >>> >>> in the course of putting together the fix just sent I got puzzled by the >>> apparent raciness of the initial part of evtchn_resize_ring(). Is it >>> intentional that the function relies on being implicitly serialized via the >>> bind mutex? >> >> Yes. >> >> Although, I'm not sure I'd call it "implicit", as I think the bind_mutex >> rather explicitly serializes bind operations (which may include resizing >> the ring). > > Well, that's only if you assume that re-sizing is something which can > only ever happen in the context of binding. As said - I had looked at > the function in isolation first; nothing says it's a helper for just one > very specific operation.
You could add a comment saying "u->bind_mutex must be locked" if you think it will help. David _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
