[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iJKq=ArBwcKTGb0VcxexvA3d96hm39e75LJLvDhBaXiTw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2025 22:02:25 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: John Ousterhout <ouster@...stanford.edu>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
horms@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 06/12] net: homa: create homa_peer.h and homa_peer.c
On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 9:54 PM John Ousterhout <ouster@...stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> I have removed the cast now.
>
> -John-
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 6:15 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 6 Jan 2025 10:12:12 -0800 John Ousterhout wrote:
> > > +void homa_dst_refresh(struct homa_peertab *peertab, struct homa_peer *peer,
> > > + struct homa_sock *hsk)
> > > +{
> > > + struct dst_entry *dst;
> > > +
> > > + spin_lock_bh(&peertab->write_lock);
> > > + dst = homa_peer_get_dst(peer, &hsk->inet);
> > > + if (!IS_ERR(dst)) {
> > > + struct homa_dead_dst *dead = (struct homa_dead_dst *)
> > > + kmalloc(sizeof(*dead), GFP_KERNEL);
> >
While you are at it, I suggest you test your patch with LOCKDEP enabled,
and CONFIG_DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP=y
Using GFP_KERNEL while BH are blocked is not good.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists