Re: [PATCH 01/12] VMCI: context implementation.

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 06:03:42PM -0700, George Zhang wrote:
> +/*
> + * Releases the VMCI context. If this is the last reference to
> + * the context it will be deallocated. A context is created with
> + * a reference count of one, and on destroy, it is removed from
> + * the context list before its reference count is
> + * decremented. Thus, if we reach zero, we are sure that nobody
> + * else are about to increment it (they need the entry in the
> + * context list for that). This function musn't be called with a
> + * lock held.
> + */
> +void vmci_ctx_release(struct vmci_ctx *context)
> +{
> +	ASSERT(context);
> +	kref_put(&context->kref, ctx_free_ctx);
> +}
> +

Hm, are you _sure_ you should be calling this without a lock held?
That's usually kref-101, you MUST hold a lock when calling put,
otherwise you can race a kref_get() call, and all hell can break loose.

Because of this, some saner people (like Al Viro), have suggested that I
force the kref_put() and kref_get() calls pass in a spinlock just to
enforce this.

So, tell me what I'm missing here, and why you put the comment here
saying that it really is supposed to be called without a lock held?  How
is that safe?

confused,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/