From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5433C433EF for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 15:22:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63DC61100 for ; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 15:22:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235930AbhJEPXy (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Oct 2021 11:23:54 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:39870 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229936AbhJEPXx (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Oct 2021 11:23:53 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 219E061165; Tue, 5 Oct 2021 15:22:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1633447322; bh=dy4Pbx/u37op3cyiFKAO9wWej5io68NapucgdT7CYc8=; h=In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Cc:To:Date:From; b=Kr/8i3vCV7AmEplVPGdeBOmvLWQ7fi7qh/yFaqvIbqGAlUNVukVve5rdCJnnbK9/A I1eXyhu0HzohsdObHQfdQlmM/nRRKBB/D1ruF1woiPy9RGQdya01//b0ZQwA4QXMuI ulARi8iIo3WXKvySAsYSzlsCHGfbeLup0XVl3Br94vkod6gR/gSbRMU/AQo1WwYly8 Hf4Pksg1d/YLx4APeDRHgAaaXnsrMfDWHeDBYmXC8XCWqjDkalWeRsRyIpfYwOzPpS GWnV7OJjptoM8noKRna2zo4W85k+a4w7b2FsIBgCqGoGJXSFCq3bBCcV1EQyta1ntn q4jblzFNecc3g== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <20210929063126.4a702dbd@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> References: <20210928125500.167943-1-atenart@kernel.org> <20210928125500.167943-9-atenart@kernel.org> <20210928170229.4c1431c7@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <163290399584.3047.8100336131824633098@kwain> <20210929063126.4a702dbd@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 8/9] net: delay device_del until run_todo From: Antoine Tenart Cc: davem@davemloft.net, pabeni@redhat.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, ebiederm@xmission.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, juri.lelli@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Jakub Kicinski Message-ID: <163344731953.4226.7213722603777320810@kwain> Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2021 17:21:59 +0200 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Quoting Jakub Kicinski (2021-09-29 15:31:26) >=20 > Well, it's a little wobbly but I think the direction is sane. > FWIW the other two pieces of feedback I have is try to avoid the > synchronize_net() in patch 7 and add a new helper for the name > checking, which would return bool. The callers don't have any=20 > business getting the struct. I'll work on an RFC v2 including modifications discussed in this thread (especially the ones raised about queues attributes; investigating if it can be fixed). I might send the patches about the name checking helper separately to reduce the size of the series, as I think they bring value outside of it. (In the meantime suggestions or reviews from others are still welcomed). BTW, what are your thoughts on patch 1? It is not strictly linked to the others (or to other solutions that might arise). Thanks! Antoine