[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250218190258.5c82026b@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 19:02:58 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
pabeni@...hat.com, Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 07/12] net: hold netdev instance lock during
ndo_bpf
On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 18:09:43 -0800 Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> --- a/kernel/bpf/offload.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/offload.c
> @@ -528,10 +528,10 @@ struct bpf_map *bpf_map_offload_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>
> bpf_map_init_from_attr(&offmap->map, attr);
> -
> rtnl_lock();
> - down_write(&bpf_devs_lock);
> offmap->netdev = __dev_get_by_index(net, attr->map_ifindex);
> + netdev_lock_ops(offmap->netdev);
> + down_write(&bpf_devs_lock);
> err = bpf_dev_offload_check(offmap->netdev);
> if (err)
> goto err_unlock;
> @@ -548,12 +548,14 @@ struct bpf_map *bpf_map_offload_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
>
> list_add_tail(&offmap->offloads, &ondev->maps);
> up_write(&bpf_devs_lock);
> + netdev_unlock_ops(offmap->netdev);
> rtnl_unlock();
>
> return &offmap->map;
>
> err_unlock:
> up_write(&bpf_devs_lock);
> + netdev_unlock_ops(offmap->netdev);
> rtnl_unlock();
> bpf_map_area_free(offmap);
> return ERR_PTR(err);
Any reason for this lock ordering? My intuition would be from biggest
to smallest, so rtnl_lock -> sem -> instance
Powered by blists - more mailing lists