[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <AE75D960-0AFD-4F18-9B1F-1F693338C056@bamaicloud.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2025 21:30:19 +0800
From: Tonghao Zhang <tonghao@...aicloud.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Jay Vosburgh <jv@...sburgh.net>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org>,
Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: bonding: use workqueue to make sure peer
notify updated in lacp mode
> On Nov 20, 2025, at 20:42, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 11/20/25 1:33 PM, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>> On 11/18/25 10:03 AM, Tonghao Zhang wrote:
>>> +static void bond_peer_notify_handler(struct work_struct *work)
>>> +{
>>> + struct bonding *bond = container_of(work, struct bonding,
>>> + peer_notify_work.work);
>>> +
>>> + if (!rtnl_trylock())
>>> + goto rearm;
>>
>> Why trylock() here? This is process context, you could just call
>>
>> rtnl_lock();
>>
>> and no re-schedule.
>
> Whoops, sorry, I lacked the context. ndo_close() will try to flush the
> work under the rtnl lock; the workqueue must not block on such lock to
> avoid deadlock.
>
> Still a comment above would be nice/useful for future memory.
Yes, I will add a comment in bond_work_init_all(), so if others add new workqueue, they should see the reminder.
>
> /P
Powered by blists - more mailing lists