[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89i+rZx4vex5N1RQE=y3uzd9yCjHOu5_6phUpZGyVmfUPOg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 23:20:23 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>,
Jiri Benc <jbenc@...hat.com>,
Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Correct usage of dev_base_lock in 2020
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 10:53 PM Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 10:46:00PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > You can not use dev_base_lock() or RCU and call an ndo_get_stats64()
> > that could sleep.
> >
> > You can not for example start changing bonding, since bond_get_stats()
> > could be called from non-sleepable context (net/core/net-procfs.c)
> >
> > I am still referring to your patch adding :
> >
> > + if (!rtnl_locked)
> > + rtnl_lock();
> >
> > This is all I said.
>
> Ah, ok, well I didn't show you all the patches, did I?
Have you sent them during Thanksgiving perhaps ?
I suggest you follow normal submission process, sending patch series
rather than inlining multiple patches in one email, this is becoming
hard to follow.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists