[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171115000359.5a059580@cakuba>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 00:03:59 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, mlxsw@...lanox.com,
andrew@...n.ch, vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com,
f.fainelli@...il.com, michael.chan@...adcom.com,
ganeshgr@...lsio.com, saeedm@...lanox.com, matanb@...lanox.com,
leonro@...lanox.com, idosch@...lanox.com, ast@...nel.org,
daniel@...earbox.net, simon.horman@...ronome.com,
pieter.jansenvanvuuren@...ronome.com, john.hurley@...ronome.com,
alexander.h.duyck@...el.com, linville@...driver.com,
gospo@...adcom.com, steven.lin1@...adcom.com, yuvalm@...lanox.com,
ogerlitz@...lanox.com, dsa@...ulusnetworks.com,
roopa@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC v2 03/11] devlink: Add support for reload
On Tue, 14 Nov 2017 17:18:44 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> +static int devlink_nl_cmd_reload(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info)
> +{
> + struct devlink *devlink = info->user_ptr[0];
> + int err;
> +
> + if (!devlink->ops->reload)
> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> +
> + err = devlink_resources_validate(devlink, NULL, info);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + mutex_unlock(&devlink->lock);
> + err = devlink->ops->reload(devlink);
> + mutex_lock(&devlink->lock);
> +
> + return err;
> +}
I'm a bit confused with the locking, why is devlink->lock not held
around the validation?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists