Messages in this thread | | | From | Michael Kelley <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH 3/3] PCI: hv: Add pci_destroy_slot() in pci_devices_present_work(), if necessary | Date | Wed, 20 Mar 2019 21:44:06 +0000 |
| |
From: Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com> Sent: Monday, March 4, 2019 1:35 PM > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c > index b489412e3502..82acd6155adf 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-hyperv.c > @@ -1776,6 +1776,10 @@ static void pci_devices_present_work(struct work_struct *work) > hpdev = list_first_entry(&removed, struct hv_pci_dev, > list_entry); > list_del(&hpdev->list_entry); > + > + if (hpdev->pci_slot) > + pci_destroy_slot(hpdev->pci_slot);
The code is inconsistent in whether hpdev->pci_slot is set to NULL after calling pci_destory_slot(). Patch 2 in this series does set it to NULL, but this code does not. And the code in hv_eject_device_work() does not set it to NULL.
It looks like all the places that test the value of hpdev->pci_slot or call pci_destroy_slot() are serialized, so it looks like it really doesn't matter. But when the code is inconsistent about setting to NULL, it always makes me wonder if there is a reason.
Michael
> + > put_pcichild(hpdev); > } > > -- > 2.19.1
| |