[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ba5bef44-c823-4ec3-bf2d-66f66821d043@davidwei.uk>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 11:20:59 -0700
From: David Wei <dw@...idwei.uk>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
Andy Gospodarek <andrew.gospodarek@...adcom.com>,
Adrian Alvarado <adrian.alvarado@...adcom.com>,
Somnath Kotur <somnath.kotur@...adcom.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/2] bnxt_en: implement netdev_queue_mgmt_ops
On 2024-06-21 17:20, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jun 2024 23:29:31 -0700 David Wei wrote:
>> + /* At this point, this NAPI instance has another page pool associated
>> + * with it. Disconnect here before freeing the old page pool to avoid
>> + * warnings.
>> + */
>> + rxr->page_pool->p.napi = NULL;
>> + page_pool_destroy(rxr->page_pool);
>> + rxr->page_pool = NULL;
>
> What's the warning you hit?
> We should probably bring back page_pool_unlink_napi(),
> if this is really needed.
This one:
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc5/source/net/core/page_pool.c#L1030
The cause is having two different bnxt_rx_ring_info referring to the
same NAPI instance. One is the proper one in bp->rx_ring, the other is
the temporarily allocated one for holding the "replacement" during the
reset.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists