Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 4/6] ioreq-server: on-demand creation of ioreq server

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Campbell
> Sent: 14 March 2014 11:04
> To: Paul Durrant
> Cc: George Dunlap; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 4/6] ioreq-server: on-demand creation of
> ioreq server
> 
> On Tue, 2014-03-11 at 10:54 +0000, Paul Durrant wrote:
> > > > -static void hvm_destroy_ioreq_page(
> > > > -    struct domain *d, struct hvm_ioreq_page *iorp)
> > > > +static void hvm_destroy_ioreq_page(struct hvm_ioreq_server *s,
> bool_t
> > > buf)
> > > >  {
> > > > -    spin_lock(&iorp->lock);
> > > > +    struct hvm_ioreq_page *iorp;
> > > >
> > > > -    ASSERT(d->is_dying);
> > > > +    iorp = buf ? &s->buf_ioreq : &s->ioreq;
> > > >
> > > >      destroy_ring_for_helper(&iorp->va, iorp->page);
> > > > -
> > > > -    spin_unlock(&iorp->lock);
> > >
> > > BTW, is there a reason you're getting rid of the locks here?
> > >
> >
> > Yes, I don't believe it is needed.
> 
> This smells like a separate patch to me, but at the very least removing
> a lock needs mention in the commit message.
> 

Ok. I can prefix the series with a lock removal patch.

  Paul
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel