netdev - Re: [PATCH] can: rcar_canfd: Add Renesas R-Car CAN FD driver

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

Message-ID: <56D6BEAC.10408@pengutronix.de>
Date:	Wed, 2 Mar 2016 11:21:32 +0100
From:	Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To:	Ramesh Shanmugasundaram <ramesh.shanmugasundaram@...renesas.com>,
	"wg@...ndegger.com" <wg@...ndegger.com>,
	"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	"pawel.moll@....com" <pawel.moll@....com>,
	"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
	"ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk" <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	"galak@...eaurora.org" <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	"corbet@....net" <corbet@....net>
Cc:	"linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
	<linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-can@...r.kernel.org" <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"geert+renesas@...der.be" <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
	Chris Paterson <Chris.Paterson2@...esas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: rcar_canfd: Add Renesas R-Car CAN FD driver

On 03/02/2016 11:08 AM, Ramesh Shanmugasundaram wrote:
>>>> I see no locking for the tx-path.
>>>
>>> I am not sure why locking is needed in tx-path?
>>
>> If the tx-path is shared between both channels you need locking as the
>> networking subsystem may send one frame to each controller at the same
>> time.
> 
> Yes. Tx completion interrupt is shared by both channels but the Tx
> FIFO, echo skbs, head, tail are maintained on a per channel basis. 
> Yes, net subsystem can send one frame to each channel at the same
> time and the tx completion interrupt handler will traverse each
> channel & update per channel context accordingly.

Ok. Which instruction starts the transmit? Please add a comment to the
code. You stop the tx_queue after this, so your code is racy, as the
interrupt might happen in between.

>>> However, looking at it again, I should move the incrementing of head
>>> after the "sts" handing to be apt. What do you think?
>>
>> With one producer (one SW instance) and one consumer (the HW) you can
>> write lockless code (if the HW allows it), but with two producers it's not
>> possible.
> 
> For a channel represented as netdev, there is still one producer (one
> SW instance) isn't it? net acquires lock before calling xmit. The
> consumer is tx completion interrupt handler which updates per channel
> attributes only.

Ok - I haven't looked at the code in depth yet. Now it's clear, that
just the tx interrupt is shared.

> Sorry if I am annoying. I have tested this with two channels
> transmitting & receiving at the same time and it works fine. If I am
> missing lock, I would like to understand it thoroughly before making
> the change.

Marc

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                  | Marc Kleine-Budde           |
Industrial Linux Solutions        | Phone: +49-231-2826-924     |
Vertretung West/Dortmund          | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686  | http://www.pengutronix.de   |


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (456 bytes)