[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210104095309.28682a9b@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 09:53:09 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] docs: net: fix documentation on .ndo_get_stats
On Mon, 4 Jan 2021 12:42:27 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 07:45:24PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > Fix calling context.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> > ---
> > Documentation/networking/netdevices.rst | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/networking/netdevices.rst b/Documentation/networking/netdevices.rst
> > index 5a85fcc80c76..a80676f5477d 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/networking/netdevices.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/networking/netdevices.rst
> > @@ -64,8 +64,8 @@ struct net_device synchronization rules
> > Context: process
> >
> > ndo_get_stats:
> > - Synchronization: dev_base_lock rwlock.
> > - Context: nominally process, but don't sleep inside an rwlock
> > + Synchronization: rtnl_lock() semaphore, or RCU.
> > + Context: atomic
> >
> > ndo_start_xmit:
> > Synchronization: __netif_tx_lock spinlock.
>
> And what happened to dev_base_lock? Did it suddenly go away?
I thought all callers switched to RCU. You investigated this in depth,
did I miss something? I'm sending this correction because I have a
series which adds to other sections of this file and this jumped out
to me as incorrect.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists