[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211006063558.6f4ee82d@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2021 06:35:58 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
mlxsw@...dia.com, Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
Shay Drory <shayd@...dia.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/5] devlink: Allow set specific ops
callbacks dynamically
On Wed, 6 Oct 2021 06:37:44 +0300 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> Let's chose random kernel version (v5.11)
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.11/source/net/core/devlink.c#L10245
> as you can see, it doesn't hold ANY driver core locks,
Nope, that is not what I see.
> so it can be called in any time during driver .probe() or .remove().
Having a callback invoked after registering to a subsystem (which used
to be the case for devlink before the changes) is _normal_.
You keep talking about .probe() like it's some magic period of complete
quiescence.
> Drivers that have implemented ops.flash_update() have no idea about that.
I bet.
I don't think this discussion is going anywhere, count me out.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists