From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cong Wang Subject: Re: [patch net v2 1/4] net/sched: Change tc_action refcnt and bindcnt to atomic Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 20:00:18 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1508152718-28726-1-git-send-email-chrism@mellanox.com> <1508152718-28726-2-git-send-email-chrism@mellanox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Chris Mi , Linux Kernel Network Developers , Lucas Bates , Jiri Pirko , David Miller To: Jamal Hadi Salim Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f177.google.com ([209.85.192.177]:56531 "EHLO mail-pf0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750960AbdJTDAj (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Oct 2017 23:00:39 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f177.google.com with SMTP id b85so8922325pfj.13 for ; Thu, 19 Oct 2017 20:00:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 7:21 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > On 17-10-18 12:43 PM, Cong Wang wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 6:03 PM, Chris Mi wrote: >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- > > >> >> You listed 3 problems, and you think they are 3 different ones, here >> I argue problem 3 (using RCU callbacks) is the cause of problem 1 >> (refcnt not atomic). This is why I mentioned I have been thinking about >> removing RCU callbacks, because it probably could fix all of them. >> > > Cong, > Given this is a known bug (the test case Chris presented crashes the > kernel) - would it make sense to have a patch that goes to -net > to fix this while your approach and discussion outcome goes into > net-next? I am not sure. Because Chris' patchset is large too and I don't think it could fix all crashes, so it has little value to just apply them for -net.