search for: the_virtio_sock

...s I can tell. No matter what, you will either get the value before it's changed or after it's changed. Since you should never publish the pointer by assigning it until the object is fully initialized, this can never be a problem even without the mutex being there. Even if you sampled the the_virtio_sock value right before it's being set to NULL by the remove function, that still can happen with the mutex held too. This function is also terribly named btw, it implies that a reference count is being taken. But that's not what this function does, it just returns the pointer value as-is.

During the review of "[PATCH] vsock/virtio: Initialize core virtio vsock before registering the driver", Stefan pointed out some possible issues in the .probe() and .remove() callbacks of the virtio-vsock driver. This series tries to solve these issues: - Patch 1 postpones the 'the_virtio_vsock' assignment at the end of the .probe() to avoid that some sockets queue works when

During the review of "[PATCH] vsock/virtio: Initialize core virtio vsock before registering the driver", Stefan pointed out some possible issues in the .probe() and .remove() callbacks of the virtio-vsock driver. This series tries to solve these issues: - Patch 1 postpones the 'the_virtio_vsock' assignment at the end of the .probe() to avoid that some sockets queue works when