Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 09 May 2019 13:58:09 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <20190509.135809.630741953977432246.davem@davemloft.net>
To:     sunilmut@microsoft.com
Cc:     kys@microsoft.com, haiyangz@microsoft.com, sthemmin@microsoft.com,
        sashal@kernel.org, decui@microsoft.com, mikelley@microsoft.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hv_sock: Fix data loss upon socket close
From:   David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <BN6PR21MB0465168DEA6CABA910832A5BC0320@BN6PR21MB0465.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
References: <BN6PR21MB0465168DEA6CABA910832A5BC0320@BN6PR21MB0465.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

From: Sunil Muthuswamy <sunilmut@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 23:10:35 +0000

> +static inline void hvs_shutdown_lock_held(struct hvsock *hvs, int mode)

Please do not use the inline keyword in foo.c files, let the compiler decide.

Also, longer term thing, I notice that vsock_remove_socket() is very
inefficient locking-wise.  It takes the table lock to do the placement
test, and takes it again to do the removal.  Might even be racy.