netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: change netdev_unregister_timeout

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: <CACT4Y+ZVPrZMs3Uq0O1iSCtmwnNHKzbYV2W2Mu43cerrWZt6rA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 Mar 2021 15:53:50 +0100
From:   Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:     Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: change netdev_unregister_timeout_secs min value to 1

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 3:43 PM Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> On 3/25/21 3:38 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 3:34 PM Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> >> On 3/25/21 11:31 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >>> netdev_unregister_timeout_secs=0 can lead to printing the
> >>> "waiting for dev to become free" message every jiffy.
> >>> This is too frequent and unnecessary.
> >>> Set the min value to 1 second.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
> >>> Suggested-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> >>> Fixes: 5aa3afe107d9 ("net: make unregister netdev warning timeout configurable")
> >>> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
> >>> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> >>> ---
> >>
> >> Please respin your patch, and fix the merge issue [1]
> >
> > Is net-next rebuilt and rebased? Do I send v4 of the whole change?
> > I cannot base it on net-next now, because net-next already includes
> > most of it... so what should I use as base then?
> >
> >> For networking patches it is customary to tell if its for net or net-next tree.
> >>
> >> [1]
> >> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> >> index 4bb6dcdbed8b856c03dc4af8b7fafe08984e803f..7bb00b8b86c6494c033cf57460f96ff3adebe081 100644
> >> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> >> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> >> @@ -10431,7 +10431,7 @@ static void netdev_wait_allrefs(struct net_device *dev)
> >>
> >>                 refcnt = netdev_refcnt_read(dev);
> >>
> >> -               if (refcnt &&
> >> +               if (refcnt != 1 &&
> >>                     time_after(jiffies, warning_time +
> >>                                netdev_unregister_timeout_secs * HZ)) {
> >>                         pr_emerg("unregister_netdevice: waiting for %s to become free. Usage count = %d\n",
>
> Please include my fix into your patch.
>
> Send a V2, based on current net-next.
>
> net-next is never rebased, we have to fix the bug by adding a fix on top of it.

Ah, got it. Mailed:
[PATCH net-next v2] net: change netdev_unregister_timeout_secs min value to 1