[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAF=yD-Ldc_K+MTd_wXNjvvQ-+UsjZOs+13irmRoGJzJmq5yfVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 14:03:05 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार)
<maheshb@...gle.com>
Cc: Petar Penkov <peterpenkov96@...il.com>,
linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Petar Bozhidarov Penkov <ppenkov@...nford.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH,v2,net-next 1/2] tun: enable NAPI for TUN/TAP driver
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार)
<maheshb@...gle.com> wrote:
>> #ifdef CONFIG_TUN_VNET_CROSS_LE
>> static inline bool tun_legacy_is_little_endian(struct tun_struct *tun)
>> {
>> @@ -541,6 +604,11 @@ static void __tun_detach(struct tun_file *tfile, bool clean)
>>
>> tun = rtnl_dereference(tfile->tun);
>>
>> + if (tun && clean) {
>> + tun_napi_disable(tun, tfile);
> are we missing synchronize_net() separating disable and del calls?
That is not needed here. napi_disable has its own mechanism for waiting
until a napi struct is no longer run. netif_napi_del will call synchronize_net
if needed. These two calls are made one after the other in quite a few drivers.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists