[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM_iQpWgLzm1ckzVQSGWqs1Qv4GBRy-hDKd48cgC6CCKDQjoFA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 18:12:06 -0700
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To: Leandro Dorileo <leandro.maciel.dorileo@...el.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
vedang.patel@...el.com, andre.guedes@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net V5 1/2] net/sched: taprio: fix picos_per_byte miscalculation
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 5:20 PM Leandro Dorileo
<leandro.maciel.dorileo@...el.com> wrote:
> +static int taprio_dev_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long event,
> + void *ptr)
> +{
> + struct net_device *dev = netdev_notifier_info_to_dev(ptr);
> + struct taprio_sched *q;
> + struct net_device *qdev;
> +
> + ASSERT_RTNL();
> +
> + if (event != NETDEV_UP && event != NETDEV_CHANGE)
> + return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> + spin_lock(&taprio_list_lock);
> + list_for_each_entry(q, &taprio_list, taprio_list) {
> + qdev = qdisc_dev(q->root);
> + if (qdev == dev) {
> + taprio_set_picos_per_byte(dev, q);
> + break;
Is it safe to call __ethtool_get_link_ksettings() with spinlock held?
I mean is it blocking?
Please audit all the dev->ethtool_ops->get_link_ksettings(),
I just look at a few of them, it seems good.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists