[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAo+4rW=zh_d7AxJSP0uLuO7w+_PmbBfBr6D4=4X2Ays7ATqoA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2023 17:01:07 +0800
From: Chengfeng Ye <dg573847474@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: jhs@...atatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, jiri@...nulli.us,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/sched: use spin_lock_bh() on &gact->tcf_lock
Hi Jakub,
Thanks for the reply,
I inspected the code a bit more, it seems that the TC action is called from
tcf_proto_ops.classify() callback, which is called from Qdisc_ops enqueue
callback.
Then Qdisc enqueue callback is from
-> __dev_queue_xmit()
-> __dev_xmit_skb()
-> dev_qdisc_enqueue()
inside the net core. It seems that this __dev_queue_xmit() callback is
typically called from BH context (e.g., NET_TX_SOFTIRQ) with BH
already disabled, but sometimes also can from a work queue under
process context, one case is the br_mrp_test_work_expired() inside
net/bridge/br_mrp.c. Does it indicate that this TC action could also be
called with BH enable? I am not a developer so really not sure about it,
as the networking code is a bit long and complicated.
Thanks again,
Chengfeng
Powered by blists - more mailing lists