[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180516172427-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 17:24:47 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] pfifo_fast: drop unneeded additional lock
on dequeue
On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 09:56:16AM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-05-15 at 23:17 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 04:24:37PM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > > After the previous patch, for NOLOCK qdiscs, q->seqlock is
> > > always held when the dequeue() is invoked, we can drop
> > > any additional locking to protect such operation.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
> > > ---
> > > include/linux/skb_array.h | 5 +++++
> > > net/sched/sch_generic.c | 4 ++--
> > > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > Is the seqlock taken during qdisc_change_tx_queue_len?
> > We need to prevent that racing with dequeue.
>
> Thanks for the head-up! I missed that code-path.
>
> I'll add the lock in qdisc_change_tx_queue_len() in v2.
>
> Thanks you,
>
> Paolo
When you do, make sure locks nest consistently.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists