[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aGTp1oyDGPwErXNO@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2025 01:12:06 -0700
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
To: David Wei <dw@...idwei.uk>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] netdevsim: implement peer queue flow control
Hello David,
On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 03:26:07PM -0700, David Wei wrote:
> On 2025-07-01 11:10, Breno Leitao wrote:
> [...]> diff --git a/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c b/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c
> > index e36d3e846c2dc..43f31bc134b0a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c
> > @@ -351,6 +406,9 @@ static int nsim_rcv(struct nsim_rq *rq, int budget)
> > dev_dstats_rx_dropped(dev);
> > }
> > + rcu_read_lock();
> > + nsim_start_peer_tx_queue(dev, rq);
> > + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> Could the rcu_read_{un}lock() be moved into the
> nsim_start/stop_peer_tx_queue() functions to keep it together with
> rcu_dereference()?
Yes, for sure. In fact, I will update and move the locking primitives to
inside the functions.
Thanks for the feedback,
--breno
Powered by blists - more mailing lists