linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 5/6] netconsole: resume previously deactivated target

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <faql444wbuoqwtfsl2722xjphijchannmdk2d5gemupnpluhom@bvv2k6zy7lhx>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 23:42:08 +0000
From: Andre Carvalho <asantostc@...il.com>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, 
	Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 5/6] netconsole: resume previously
 deactivated target

On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 09:52:10AM -0800, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > The main reason why I opted for a helper in netpoll was to keep reference
> > tracking for these devices strictly inside netpoll and have simmetry between
> > setup and cleanup. Having said that, this might be an overkill and I'm fine with 
> > dropping the helper and taking your suggestion.
> 
> Right, that makes sense. Would we have other owners for that function?

I've looked at other drivers using netpoll and from what I could find all of them
are using __netpoll_setup paired with __netpoll_free. They don't seem to 
rely on dev_tracker to track references, I'd need to look a bit more to be certain,
but I think other callers are own the devices and track their lifecycle separately.
So I don't think this would be useful for them.

Since we are moving netpoll_cleanup to netconsole in your patch below, I think I should
drop the netpoll helper and keep it in netconsole. I wonder if we should consider
moving do_netpoll_cleanup to netconsole as well, since it seems to be the only caller
and then we would have the same symmetry I mentioned above.

So, to summarize, given your refactor patch I think it makes sense drop the previous
patch and do the netdev_hold in netconsole as you suggested. Does that sound good?

-- 
Andre Carvalho