Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 29 Jun 2020 19:06:44 +0000
From:   Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>
To:     Andres Beltran <t-mabelt@microsoft.com>
Cc:     Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>, Andres Beltran <lkmlabelt@gmail.com>,
        KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>,
        Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>,
        "linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Michael Kelley <mikelley@microsoft.com>,
        "parri.andrea@gmail.com" <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Drivers: hv: vmbus: Add vmbus_requestor data
 structure for VMBus hardening
Message-ID: <20200629190644.hlem6jskyx26csaj@liuwe-devbox-debian-v2>
References: <CH2PR21MB149464F9EF20C516C6FB362A8B6E0@CH2PR21MB1494.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CH2PR21MB149464F9EF20C516C6FB362A8B6E0@CH2PR21MB1494.namprd21.prod.outlook.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 06:19:46PM +0000, Andres Beltran wrote:
[...]
> > >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vmbus_recvpacket_raw);
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * vmbus_next_request_id - Returns a new request id. It is also
> > > + * the index at which the guest memory address is stored.
> > > + * Uses a spin lock to avoid race conditions.
> > > + * @rqstor: Pointer to the requestor struct
> > > + * @rqst_add: Guest memory address to be stored in the array
> > > + */
> > > +u64 vmbus_next_request_id(struct vmbus_requestor *rqstor, u64 rqst_addr)
> > > +{
> > > +	unsigned long flags;
> > > +	u64 current_id;
> > > +
> > > +	spin_lock_irqsave(&rqstor->req_lock, flags);
> > 
> > Do you really need the irqsave variant here? I.e. is there really a
> > chance this code is reachable from an interrupt handler?
> 
> Other VMBus drivers will also need to use this functionality, and
> some of them will be called with interrupts disabled. So, I think
> we should keep the irqsave variant here.
> 

Okay. This makes sense.

Wei.