Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock

[PATCH v2 0/3] vsock/virtio: several fixes in the .probe() and .remove() · Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> · 2019-06-28
[PATCH v2 1/3] vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock · Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> · 2019-06-28
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock · Stefan Hajnoczi <hidden> · 2019-07-01
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock · Stefan Hajnoczi <hidden> · 2019-07-01
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock · Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> · 2019-07-03
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock · Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> · 2019-07-03
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock · Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> · 2019-07-04
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock · Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> · 2019-07-04
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock · Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> · 2019-07-05
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock · Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> · 2019-07-04
[PATCH v2 2/3] vsock/virtio: stop workers during the .remove() · Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> · 2019-06-28
Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] vsock/virtio: stop workers during the .remove() · Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> · 2019-07-04
[PATCH v2 3/3] vsock/virtio: fix flush of works during the .remove() · Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> · 2019-06-28
Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] vsock/virtio: fix flush of works during the .remove() · Stefan Hajnoczi <hidden> · 2019-07-01
Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] vsock/virtio: fix flush of works during the .remove() · Stefan Hajnoczi <hidden> · 2019-07-01
Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] vsock/virtio: several fixes in the .probe() and .remove() · Stefan Hajnoczi <hidden> · 2019-07-01
Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] vsock/virtio: several fixes in the .probe() and .remove() · Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> · 2019-07-01
Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] vsock/virtio: several fixes in the .probe() and .remove() · Stefan Hajnoczi <hidden> · 2019-07-03
Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] vsock/virtio: several fixes in the .probe() and .remove() · Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> · 2019-07-03

From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
Date: 2019-07-04 10:17:08
Also in: kvm, lkml

On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 12:41:35PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:

On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 05:53:58PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:

quoted

On 2019/6/28 下午8:36, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
Another more interesting question, I believe we will do singleton for
virtio_vsock structure. Then what's the point of using vdev->priv to access
the_virtio_vsock? It looks to me we can it brings extra troubles for doing
synchronization.

I thought about it when I tried to use RCU to stop the worker and I
think make sense. Maybe can be another series after this will be merged.

@Stefan, what do you think about that?

Yes, let's make it a singleton and keep no other references to it.

Stefan

Attachments

signature.asc [application/pgp-signature] 488 bytes

`h`	back out one level
`j`	next message in thread
`k`	previous message in thread
`l`	drill in
`Esc`	close help / fold thread tree
`?`	toggle this help