On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 12:44 PM Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 01:15:33PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > These patches try to handle the hot-unplug of vsock virtio transport device > > in > > a proper way. > > > > Maybe move the vsock_core_init()/vsock_core_exit() functions in the > > module_init > > and module_exit of vsock_virtio_transport module can't be the best way, but > > the > > architecture of vsock_core forces us to this approach for now. > > > > The vsock_core proto_ops expect a valid pointer to the transport device, so > > we > > can't call vsock_core_exit() until there are open sockets. > > > > Another (little more complex) approach during the device removal, could be > > to > > unregister the AF_VSOCK protocol, then reset all sockets and wait for their > > destruction. At this point, we can set the transport pointer to NULL. > > > > Any suggestions would be helpful. > > > > Stefano Garzarella (2): > > vsock/virtio: fix kernel panic after device hot-unplug > > vsock/virtio: reset connected sockets on device removal > > > > net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++-------- > > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > 2.19.2 > > > > Fine in the current model. Once we tackle nested virtualization > (two transports at once) we'll have to revisit this.
I completely agree with you! > > Acked-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefa...@redhat.com> I'll send a v2 fixing the commit message of patch 1. Thanks, Stefano -- Stefano Garzarella Red Hat
