[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221206172426.7e7cf3bf@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 17:24:26 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>
Cc: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
nbd@....name, john@...ozen.org, sean.wang@...iatek.com,
Mark-MC.Lee@...iatek.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
pabeni@...hat.com, matthias.bgg@...il.com,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ethernet: mtk_wed: fix possible deadlock
if mtk_wed_wo_init fails
On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 00:52:28 +0100 Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
> > FWIW, that does seem slightly better to me as well.
> > Also - aren't you really fixing multiple issues here
> > (even if on the same error path)? The locking,
> > the null-checking and the change in mtk_wed_wo_reset()?
>
> wo NULL pointer issue was not hit before for the deadlock one (so I fixed them
> in the same patch).
> Do you prefer to split them in two patches? (wo null pointer fix first).
Yes, I think they are different issues even if once "covers" the other.
I think it'd make the review / judgment easier.
> I have posted v2 addressing Leon's comments but I need to post a v3 to add
> missing WARN_ON.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists