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:   Wed, 18 Aug 2021 10:39:08 -0600
From:   Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To:     Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc:     Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>,
        Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, cohuck@redhat.com,
        pasic@linux.vnet.ibm.com, jjherne@linux.ibm.com, jgg@nvidia.com,
        kwankhede@nvidia.com, david@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com,
        frankja@linux.ibm.com, imbrenda@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] s390/vfio-ap: do not open code locks for
 VFIO_GROUP_NOTIFY_SET_KVM notification
Message-ID: <20210818103908.31eb5848.alex.williamson@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <6d64bd83-1519-6065-a4cd-9356c6be5d1a@de.ibm.com>
References: <20210719193503.793910-1-akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>
        <3f45fe31-6666-ac87-3a98-dd942b5dfb3c@linux.ibm.com>
        <20210802155355.22b98789.pasic@linux.ibm.com>
        <6f37ef28-3cce-2f4f-3173-2c1e916900cc@linux.ibm.com>
        <6d64bd83-1519-6065-a4cd-9356c6be5d1a@de.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 18 Aug 2021 17:59:51 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:

> On 02.08.21 18:32, Tony Krowiak wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 8/2/21 9:53 AM, Halil Pasic wrote:  
> >> On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 09:10:26 -0400
> >> Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >>  
> >>> PING!
> >>>
> >>> This patch will pre-req version 17 of a patch series I have waiting in
> >>> the wings,
> >>> so I'd like to get this one merged ASAP. In particular, if a KVM
> >>> maintainer can
> >>> take a look at the comments concerning the taking of the kvm->lock
> >>> before the
> >>> matrix_mdev->lock it would be greatly appreciated. Those comments begin with
> >>> Message ID <20210727004329.3bcc7d4f.pasic@linux.ibm.com> from Halil Pasic.  
> >> As far as I'm concerned, we can move forward with this. Was this
> >> supposed to go in via Alex's tree?  
> > 
> > I am not certain, Christian queued the previous patches related to
> > this on:
> > 
> > 
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/s390/linux.git/log/?h=fixes
> > 
> > Jason G., since this will need to be integrated with your other patches,
> > where should this be queued?  
> 
> 
> This previous patch (s390/vfio-ap: clean up mdev resources when remove callback invoked) is
> already in master.
> Can you respin the series with all Acks and RBs?
> 
> Alex, can you then take these 2 patches via your tree? Thanks
> 
> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> for this series.


I see some review feedback that seems to suggest a new version would be
posted:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-s390/0f03ab0b-2dfd-e1c1-fe43-be2a59030a71@linux.ibm.com/

I also see in this thread:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-s390/20210721164550.5402fe1c.pasic@linux.ibm.com/

that Halil's concern's around open/close races are addressed by Jason's
device_open/close series that's already in my next branch and he
provided an Ack, but there's still the above question regarding the
kvm->lock that was looking for a review from... I'm not sure, maybe
Connie or Paolo.  Christian, is this specifically what you're ack'ing?

It can ultimately go in through my tree, but not being familiar with
this code I'd hope for more closure.  Thanks,

Alex