From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cong Wang Subject: Re: [Patch net 00/15] net_sched: remove RCU callbacks from TC Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2017 13:46:57 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20171023220304.2268-1-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> <1508800599.30291.106.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> <1508801477.30291.108.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers , "Paul E. McKenney" , Jamal Hadi Salim , John Fastabend , Chris Mi To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mail-pg0-f67.google.com ([74.125.83.67]:51829 "EHLO mail-pg0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751775AbdJYUrS (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Oct 2017 16:47:18 -0400 Received: by mail-pg0-f67.google.com with SMTP id p9so894247pgc.8 for ; Wed, 25 Oct 2017 13:47:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1508801477.30291.108.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > I did not pretend to give a bug fix, I simply said your patch series was > probably not the right way. Generally I agree with you on avoid synchronize_rcu(), but this case is very special, you need to consider case by case, not just talking generally. > > Sure, we could add back BKL and solve a lot of lockdep issues. > > For the record, this case is about race conditions which lead to real bugs, not merely lockdep warnings.