[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Yh+N2OCM+Mv3GWoO@shredder>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 17:31:36 +0200
From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: dcb: flush lingering app table entries for
unregistered devices
On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 04:36:32PM +0000, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 06:23:16PM +0200, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 06:01:54PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > +static void dcbnl_flush_dev(struct net_device *dev)
> > > +{
> > > + struct dcb_app_type *itr, *tmp;
> > > +
> > > + spin_lock(&dcb_lock);
> >
> > Should this be spin_lock_bh()? According to commit 52cff74eef5d ("dcbnl
> > : Disable software interrupts before taking dcb_lock") this lock can be
> > acquired from softIRQ.
>
> Could be. I didn't notice the explanation and I was even wondering in
> which circumstance would it be needed to disable softirqs...
> Now that I see the explanation I think the dcb_rpl -> cxgb4_dcb_handle_fw_update
> -> dcb_ieee_setapp call path is problematic, when a different
> DCB-enabled interface unregisters concurrently with a firmware event.
Yep. Can you please send a fix so that it gets into Jakub's PR tomorrow?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists