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:   Tue, 29 Sep 2020 22:26:54 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, shuo.a.liu@intel.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
        Yu Wang <yu1.wang@intel.com>,
        Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
        Yakui Zhao <yakui.zhao@intel.com>,
        Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Fengwei Yin <fengwei.yin@intel.com>,
        Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/17] x86/acrn: Introduce acrn_{setup,
 remove}_intr_handler()
Message-ID: <20200929202604.GP21110@zn.tnic>
References: <20200922114311.38804-1-shuo.a.liu@intel.com>
 <20200922114311.38804-3-shuo.a.liu@intel.com>
 <20200929175947.GL21110@zn.tnic>
 <873630jqiy.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <873630jqiy.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 10:07:17PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> That does not prevent that either and notifiers suck.

Bah, atomic notifiers run functions which cannot block, not what is
needed here, right.

> The pointer is fine and if something removes the handler before all of
> the muck is shutdown then the author can keep the pieces and mop up
> the remains.

Uhu, so what makes sure that the module is not removed while an IRQ is
happening?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette