[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8d2ee27f10a7a6c9414f10e8c0155c090b5f11e3.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 10:33:31 +0100
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Heng Qi <hengqi@...ux.alibaba.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: jasowang@...hat.com, mst@...hat.com, kuba@...nel.org,
edumazet@...gle.com, davem@...emloft.net, hawk@...nel.org,
john.fastabend@...il.com, ast@...nel.org, horms@...nel.org,
xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com, yinjun.zhang@...igine.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 4/4] virtio-net: support rx netdim
On Mon, 2023-11-27 at 10:55 +0800, Heng Qi wrote:
> @@ -4738,11 +4881,14 @@ static void remove_vq_common(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> static void virtnet_remove(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> {
> struct virtnet_info *vi = vdev->priv;
> + int i;
>
> virtnet_cpu_notif_remove(vi);
>
> /* Make sure no work handler is accessing the device. */
> flush_work(&vi->config_work);
> + for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++)
> + cancel_work(&vi->rq[i].dim.work);
If the dim work is still running here, what prevents it from completing
after the following unregister/free netdev?
It looks like you want need to call cancel_work_sync here?
Additionally the later remove_vq_common() will needless call
cancel_work() again; possibly is better to consolidate a single (sync)
call there.
Cheers,
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists