netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: provide macros for commonly copied lockless queue stop/wake code

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 22 Mar 2023 18:04:06 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
        pabeni@...hat.com, willemb@...gle.com, alexander.duyck@...il.com,
        michael.chan@...adcom.com, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
        anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: provide macros for commonly copied
 lockless queue stop/wake code

CC: maintainers, in case there isn't a repost
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230322233028.269410-1-kuba@kernel.org/

On Thu, 23 Mar 2023 01:35:34 +0100 Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 04:30:26PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > A lot of drivers follow the same scheme to stop / start queues
> > without introducing locks between xmit and NAPI tx completions.
> > I'm guessing they all copy'n'paste each other's code.
> >
> > Smaller drivers shy away from the scheme and introduce a lock
> > which may cause deadlocks in netpoll.  
> 
> I notice there is no patch 0/X. Seems like the above would be good
> material for it, along with a comment that a few drivers are converted
> to make use of the new macros.

Then do I repeat the same text in the commit? Or cut the commit down?
Doesn't that just take away information from the commit which will
show up in git blame?

Having a cover letter is a good default, and required if the series 
is a larger change decomposed into steps. But here there is a major
change and a bunch of loose conversions. More sample users than
meaningful part.

LMK what your preference for splitting this info is, I'm unsure.