netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 00/15] mlxsw: Preparation for RTNL removal

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20200220.100448.49805640721461744.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Thu, 20 Feb 2020 10:04:48 -0800 (PST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     idosch@...sch.org
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...lanox.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com,
        idosch@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/15] mlxsw: Preparation for RTNL removal

From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2020 09:07:45 +0200

> From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
> 
> The driver currently acquires RTNL in its route insertion path, which
> contributes to very large control plane latencies. This patch set
> prepares mlxsw for RTNL removal from its route insertion path in a
> follow-up patch set.
> 
> Patches #1-#2 protect shared resources - KVDL and counter pool - with
> their own locks. All allocations of these resources are currently
> performed under RTNL, so no locks were required.
> 
> Patches #3-#7 ensure that updates to mirroring sessions only take place
> in case there are active mirroring sessions. This allows us to avoid
> taking RTNL when it is unnecessary, as updating of the mirroring
> sessions must be performed under RTNL for the time being.
> 
> Patches #8-#10 replace the use of APIs that assume that RTNL is taken
> with their RCU counterparts. Specifically, patches #8 and #9 replace
> __in_dev_get_rtnl() with __in_dev_get_rcu() under RCU read-side critical
> section. Patch #10 replaces __dev_get_by_index() with
> dev_get_by_index_rcu().
> 
> Patches #11-#15 perform small adjustments in the code to make it easier
> to later introduce a router lock instead of relying on RTNL.

Series applied, thanks!