On 7/11/25 13:38, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 10/07/2025 16:47, John Levon wrote:
(added Cedric)
ah. Thanks Mark.
This reminds me that we should have maintainers/reviewers
that can send PRs for the vfio-user component.
John,
Could you please send a patch adding me and Mark may be ?
Coverity reported:
CID 1611806: Concurrent data access violations (BAD_CHECK_OF_WAIT_COND)
Please prefer :
Resolves: Coverity CID 1611805
A wait is performed without a loop. If there is a spurious wakeup, the
condition may not be satisfied.
Fix this by checking ->state for VFIO_PROXY_CLOSED in a loop.
Signed-off-by: John Levon <john.le...@nutanix.com>
---
hw/vfio-user/proxy.c | 10 ++++++----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/vfio-user/proxy.c b/hw/vfio-user/proxy.c
index c418954440..2275d3fe39 100644
--- a/hw/vfio-user/proxy.c
+++ b/hw/vfio-user/proxy.c
@@ -32,7 +32,6 @@ static void vfio_user_recycle(VFIOUserProxy *proxy,
VFIOUserMsg *msg);
static void vfio_user_recv(void *opaque);
static void vfio_user_send(void *opaque);
-static void vfio_user_cb(void *opaque);
static void vfio_user_request(void *opaque);
@@ -492,7 +491,7 @@ static void vfio_user_send(void *opaque)
}
}
-static void vfio_user_cb(void *opaque)
+static void vfio_user_close_cb(void *opaque)
{
VFIOUserProxy *proxy = opaque;
@@ -984,8 +983,11 @@ void vfio_user_disconnect(VFIOUserProxy *proxy)
* handler to run after the proxy fd handlers were
* deleted above.
*/
- aio_bh_schedule_oneshot(proxy->ctx, vfio_user_cb, proxy);
- qemu_cond_wait(&proxy->close_cv, &proxy->lock);
+ aio_bh_schedule_oneshot(proxy->ctx, vfio_user_close_cb, proxy);
+
+ while (proxy->state != VFIO_PROXY_CLOSED) {
+ qemu_cond_wait(&proxy->close_cv, &proxy->lock);
+ }
/* we now hold the only ref to proxy */
qemu_mutex_unlock(&proxy->lock);
It think it is worth mentioning the function rename in the commit message,
otherwise looks good to me:
Reviewed-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <markcaveayl...@nutanix.com>
Reviewed-by: Cédric Le Goater <c...@redhat.com>
Thanks,
C.
