On 11/04/2015 06:51 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> +     mutex_lock(&pause_lock);
> +
> +     /* The kvm->cpus array contains a null pointer in the last location */
> +     for (i = 0; ; i++) {
> +             if (kvm->cpus[i])
> +                     pthread_kill(kvm->cpus[i]->thread, SIGKVMEXIT);
> +             else
> +                     break;
> +     }
> +
> +     kvm__continue(kvm);

In this scenario: if we grabbed pause_lock, signaled vcpu0 to exit, and it did
before we called kvm__continue(), we won't end up releasing pause_lock, which
might cause a lockup later, no?


Thanks,
Sasha
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to