[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170113083408.202d6e30@xeon-e3>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 08:34:08 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Cc: jasowang@...hat.com, mst@...hat.com, john.r.fastabend@...el.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, alexei.starovoitov@...il.com,
daniel@...earbox.net
Subject: Re: [net PATCH v3 2/5] net: virtio: wrap rtnl_lock in test for
calling with lock already held
On Thu, 12 Jan 2017 18:51:00 -0800
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com> wrote:
>
> -static void free_receive_bufs(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> +static void free_receive_bufs(struct virtnet_info *vi, bool need_lock)
> {
> struct bpf_prog *old_prog;
> int i;
>
> - rtnl_lock();
> + if (need_lock)
> + rtnl_lock();
> for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) {
> while (vi->rq[i].pages)
> __free_pages(get_a_page(&vi->rq[i], GFP_KERNEL), 0);
> @@ -1879,7 +1880,8 @@ static void free_receive_bufs(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> if (old_prog)
> bpf_prog_put(old_prog);
> }
> - rtnl_unlock();
> + if (need_lock)
> + rtnl_unlock();
> }
Conditional locking is bad idea; sparse complains about it and is later source
of bugs. The more typical way of doing this in kernel is:
void _foo(some args)
{
ASSERT_RTNL();
...
}
void foo(some args)
{
rtnl_lock();
_foo(some args)
rtnl_unlock();
}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists