[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250702131803.GB904431@ziepe.ca>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2025 10:18:03 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: Abhijit Gangurde <abhijit.gangurde@....com>, shannon.nelson@....com,
brett.creeley@....com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, corbet@....net,
andrew+netdev@...n.ch, allen.hubbe@....com, nikhil.agarwal@....com,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Boyer <andrew.boyer@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/14] RDMA/ionic: Register device ops for control path
On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 01:38:44PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > +static void ionic_flush_qs(struct ionic_ibdev *dev)
> > +{
> > + struct ionic_qp *qp, *qp_tmp;
> > + struct ionic_cq *cq, *cq_tmp;
> > + LIST_HEAD(flush_list);
> > + unsigned long index;
> > +
> > + /* Flush qp send and recv */
> > + rcu_read_lock();
> > + xa_for_each(&dev->qp_tbl, index, qp) {
> > + kref_get(&qp->qp_kref);
> > + list_add_tail(&qp->ibkill_flush_ent, &flush_list);
> > + }
> > + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> Same question as for CQ. What does RCU lock protect here?
It should protect the kref_get against free of qp. The qp memory must
be RCU freed.
But this pattern requires kref_get_unless_zero()
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists