Re: [Bugfix 4/5] x86/irq: Fix a race condition between vector assigning and cleanup

[Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@stratus.com>]

On 12/01/2015 05:46 PM, Joe Lawrence wrote:
> On 11/30/2015 03:09 AM, Jiang Liu wrote:
>> Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@stratus.com> reported an use after release
>> issue related to x86 IRQ management code. Please refer to following
>> link for more information:
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1026840.html
>>
>> Thomas pointed out that it's caused by a race condition between
>> __assign_irq_vector() and __send_cleanup_vector(). Based on Thomas'
>> draft patch, we solve this race condition by:
>> 1) Use move_in_progress to signal that an IRQ cleanup IPI is needed
>> 2) Use old_domain to save old CPU mask for IRQ cleanup
>> 3) Use vector to protect move_in_progress and old_domain
>>
>> This bugfix patch also helps to get rid of that atomic allocation in
>> __send_cleanup_vector().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>
> [ ... snip ... ]
>
> Jiang, Thomas,
>
> Last night I ran with Jiang's five-patch-set on top of 4.3.  Tests
> started with regular sysfs device removal of mpt HBAs, then later I
> added disk stress (the disks are software RAID1 across the HBAs) .. no
> issues.
>
> I'll kick off some tougher surprise device removal tests tonight to
> further kick the tires.

Testing looked good.  Feel to add a Tested-by and/or Reported-by.

Thanks,

-- Joe