[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAXyoMPxG5DbfMoLztWL3W78Xf3TMMVvkKJFD8L3Dup2-hMyyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 03:09:47 +0800
From: Yangfl <mmyangfl@...il.com>
To: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>, 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>,
Phani Burra <phani.r.burra@...el.com>, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Sridhar Samudrala <sridhar.samudrala@...el.com>, Joshua Hay <joshua.a.hay@...el.com>,
intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net] idpf: Fix data race in idpf_net_dim
On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 12:50 AM Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de> wrote:
>
> Dear David,
>
>
> Thank you for your patch.
>
> Am 19.01.26 um 17:27 schrieb David Yang:
> > In idpf_net_dim(), some statistics protected by u64_stats_sync, are read
> > and accumulated in ignorance of possible u64_stats_fetch_retry() events.
> > The correct way to copy statistics is already illustrated by
> > idpf_add_queue_stats(). Fix this by reading them into temporary variables
> > first.
>
> It’d be great if you also documented a test case.
>
Sorry, I didn't get what "documente a test case" means. Triggering the
bug would require precise timing between the writer and reader. If
u64_stats_fetch_retry() returns true you already know the previous
critical section was invalid, which is documented in u64_stats_sync.h.
> > Fixes: c2d548cad150 ("idpf: add TX splitq napi poll support")
> > Fixes: 3a8845af66ed ("idpf: add RX splitq napi poll support")
> > Signed-off-by: David Yang <mmyangfl@...il.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c
> > index 97a5fe766b6b..66ba645e8b90 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c
> > @@ -3956,7 +3956,7 @@ static void idpf_update_dim_sample(struct idpf_q_vector *q_vector,
> > static void idpf_net_dim(struct idpf_q_vector *q_vector)
> > {
> > struct dim_sample dim_sample = { };
> > - u64 packets, bytes;
> > + u64 packets, bytes, pkts, bts;
>
> The new variable names are ambiguous. Would _tmp or so be better?
>
> > u32 i;
> >
> > if (!IDPF_ITR_IS_DYNAMIC(q_vector->tx_intr_mode))
> > @@ -3968,9 +3968,12 @@ static void idpf_net_dim(struct idpf_q_vector *q_vector)
> >
> > do {
> > start = u64_stats_fetch_begin(&txq->stats_sync);
> > - packets += u64_stats_read(&txq->q_stats.packets);
> > - bytes += u64_stats_read(&txq->q_stats.bytes);
> > + pkts = u64_stats_read(&txq->q_stats.packets);
> > + bts = u64_stats_read(&txq->q_stats.bytes);
> > } while (u64_stats_fetch_retry(&txq->stats_sync, start));
> > +
> > + packets += pkts;
> > + bytes += bts;
> > }
> >
> > idpf_update_dim_sample(q_vector, &dim_sample, &q_vector->tx_dim,
> > @@ -3987,9 +3990,12 @@ static void idpf_net_dim(struct idpf_q_vector *q_vector)
> >
> > do {
> > start = u64_stats_fetch_begin(&rxq->stats_sync);
> > - packets += u64_stats_read(&rxq->q_stats.packets);
> > - bytes += u64_stats_read(&rxq->q_stats.bytes);
> > + pkts = u64_stats_read(&rxq->q_stats.packets);
> > + bts = u64_stats_read(&rxq->q_stats.bytes);
> > } while (u64_stats_fetch_retry(&rxq->stats_sync, start));
> > +
> > + packets += pkts;
> > + bytes += bts;
> > }
> >
> > idpf_update_dim_sample(q_vector, &dim_sample, &q_vector->rx_dim,
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists