[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <11bdf0aa-25aa-05b4-e40b-8d108cdc9424@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 12:24:21 +0100
From: Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>, edward.cree@....com
Cc: linux-net-drivers@....com, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
habetsm.xilinx@...il.com, sudheer.mogilappagari@...el.com,
jdamato@...tly.com, andrew@...n.ch, mw@...ihalf.com, sgoutham@...vell.com,
gakula@...vell.com, sbhatta@...vell.com, hkelam@...vell.com,
saeedm@...dia.com, leon@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 net-next 6/7] net: ethtool: add a mutex protecting
RSS contexts
On 12/09/2023 17:40, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2023 at 03:21:41PM +0100, edward.cree@....com wrote:
>> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
>> index f12767466427..2acb4d8cd4c7 100644
>> --- a/net/core/dev.c
>> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
>> @@ -10054,6 +10054,7 @@ int register_netdevice(struct net_device *dev)
>> idr_init_base(&dev->ethtool->rss_ctx, 1);
>>
>> spin_lock_init(&dev->addr_list_lock);
>> + mutex_init(&dev->ethtool->rss_lock);
>
> Is there a reason to split this from the idr (eventually xarray)
> initialisation above? Surely initialisations for a feature (rss)
> should all be grouped together?
No real reason; I just thought "put locks together" made sense, but
I guess "put rss stuff together" makes more, can change it.
-e
Powered by blists - more mailing lists