[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250327121613.4d4f36ea@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2025 12:16:13 -0700
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
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 08/11] docs: net: document netdev notifier
expectations
On Thu, 27 Mar 2025 06:56:56 -0700 Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> We don't have a consistent state yet, but document where we think
> we are and where we wanna be.
Thanks for adding the doc!
> +Notifiers and netdev instance lock
> +==================================
> +
> +For device drivers that implement shaping or queue management APIs,
> +some of the notifiers (``enum netdev_cmd``) are running under the netdev
> +instance lock.
> +
> +Currently only the following notifiers are running under the instance lock:
I'd repeat again here:
... for devices with locked ops:
> +* ``NETDEV_REGISTER``
> +* ``NETDEV_UP``
> +* ``NETDEV_UNREGISTER``
Can I ask the obvious question - anything specific that's hard in also
taking it in DOWN or just no time to investigate? Symmetry would be
great.
> +There are no clear expectations for the remaining notifiers. Notifiers not on
> +the list may run with or without the instance lock, potentially even invoking
> +the same notifier type with and without the lock from different code paths.
> +The goal is to eventually ensure that all (or most, with a few documented
> +exceptions) notifiers run under the instance lock.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists