* [PATCH 1/4] bonding: don't call slave_xxx_netpoll under spinlocks
@ 2013-07-20 7:23 Ding Tianhong
2013-07-20 10:38 ` [1/4] " Veaceslav Falico
2013-07-22 22:48 ` [PATCH 1/4] " David Miller
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ding Tianhong @ 2013-07-20 7:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jay Vosburgh, Andy Gospodarek, David S. Miller, Netdev
the slave_xxx_netpoll may sleep, so it should't be called under spinlocks.
the slave point of the bonding will not be changed outside rtnl lock,
so rtnl lock is enough here.
Signed-off-by: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>
---
drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 15 +++------------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
index 07f257d4..5eb75ef 100644
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
@@ -1249,8 +1249,9 @@ static void bond_poll_controller(struct net_device *bond_dev)
{
}
-static void __bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct bonding *bond)
+static void bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct net_device *bond_dev)
{
+ struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
struct slave *slave;
int i;
@@ -1258,14 +1259,6 @@ static void __bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct bonding *bond)
if (IS_UP(slave->dev))
slave_disable_netpoll(slave);
}
-static void bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct net_device *bond_dev)
-{
- struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
-
- read_lock(&bond->lock);
- __bond_netpoll_cleanup(bond);
- read_unlock(&bond->lock);
-}
static int bond_netpoll_setup(struct net_device *dev, struct netpoll_info *ni, gfp_t gfp)
{
@@ -1273,15 +1266,13 @@ static int bond_netpoll_setup(struct net_device *dev, struct netpoll_info *ni, g
struct slave *slave;
int i, err = 0;
- read_lock(&bond->lock);
bond_for_each_slave(bond, slave, i) {
err = slave_enable_netpoll(slave);
if (err) {
- __bond_netpoll_cleanup(bond);
+ bond_netpoll_cleanup(dev);
break;
}
}
- read_unlock(&bond->lock);
return err;
}
--
1.8.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [1/4] bonding: don't call slave_xxx_netpoll under spinlocks
2013-07-20 7:23 [PATCH 1/4] bonding: don't call slave_xxx_netpoll under spinlocks Ding Tianhong
@ 2013-07-20 10:38 ` Veaceslav Falico
2013-07-22 0:40 ` Ding Tianhong
2013-07-22 22:48 ` [PATCH 1/4] " David Miller
1 sibling, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Veaceslav Falico @ 2013-07-20 10:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dingtianhong; +Cc: Jay Vosburgh, Andy Gospodarek, David S. Miller, Netdev
On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 03:23:47PM +0800, dingtianhong wrote:
>the slave_xxx_netpoll may sleep, so it should't be called under spinlocks.
I don't really see how it may sleep, it was specifically changed to not
sleep actually. However, see below...
>
>the slave point of the bonding will not be changed outside rtnl lock,
>so rtnl lock is enough here.
Yep, as far as I see there's really no need to take the lock, both the
slave list and the netpoll part are always protected by rtnl lock, unless
I'm missing something, and indeed .ndo_netpoll_setup() is always called
under rtnl.
BTW, bond_netpoll_cleanup() has the same problem - maybe you could check if
we can remove the bond->lock from there also and update the patch?
>
>Signed-off-by: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>
>
>---
>drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 15 +++------------
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>index 07f257d4..5eb75ef 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>@@ -1249,8 +1249,9 @@ static void bond_poll_controller(struct net_device *bond_dev)
> {
> }
>
>-static void __bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct bonding *bond)
>+static void bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct net_device *bond_dev)
> {
>+ struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
> struct slave *slave;
> int i;
>
>@@ -1258,14 +1259,6 @@ static void __bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct bonding *bond)
> if (IS_UP(slave->dev))
> slave_disable_netpoll(slave);
> }
>-static void bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct net_device *bond_dev)
>-{
>- struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
>-
>- read_lock(&bond->lock);
>- __bond_netpoll_cleanup(bond);
>- read_unlock(&bond->lock);
>-}
>
> static int bond_netpoll_setup(struct net_device *dev, struct netpoll_info *ni, gfp_t gfp)
> {
>@@ -1273,15 +1266,13 @@ static int bond_netpoll_setup(struct net_device *dev, struct netpoll_info *ni, g
> struct slave *slave;
> int i, err = 0;
>
>- read_lock(&bond->lock);
> bond_for_each_slave(bond, slave, i) {
> err = slave_enable_netpoll(slave);
> if (err) {
>- __bond_netpoll_cleanup(bond);
>+ bond_netpoll_cleanup(dev);
> break;
> }
> }
>- read_unlock(&bond->lock);
> return err;
> }
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [1/4] bonding: don't call slave_xxx_netpoll under spinlocks
2013-07-20 10:38 ` [1/4] " Veaceslav Falico
@ 2013-07-22 0:40 ` Ding Tianhong
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ding Tianhong @ 2013-07-22 0:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Veaceslav Falico; +Cc: Jay Vosburgh, Andy Gospodarek, David S. Miller, Netdev
On 2013/7/20 18:38, Veaceslav Falico wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 03:23:47PM +0800, dingtianhong wrote:
>> the slave_xxx_netpoll may sleep, so it should't be called under spinlocks.
>
> I don't really see how it may sleep, it was specifically changed to not
> sleep actually. However, see below...
>
I think the synchronize_rcu_bh() in slave disable_netpoll will sched and speed,so spinlock
should not used here.
>>
>> the slave point of the bonding will not be changed outside rtnl lock,
>> so rtnl lock is enough here.
>
> Yep, as far as I see there's really no need to take the lock, both the
> slave list and the netpoll part are always protected by rtnl lock, unless
> I'm missing something, and indeed .ndo_netpoll_setup() is always called
> under rtnl.
>
> BTW, bond_netpoll_cleanup() has the same problem - maybe you could check if
> we can remove the bond->lock from there also and update the patch?
>
yes, this patch has remove bond_netpoll_cleanup(), and change _bond_netpoll_cleanup() to bond_netpoll_cleanup(), rtnl lock is enough here.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>
>>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 15 +++------------
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>> index 07f257d4..5eb75ef 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>> @@ -1249,8 +1249,9 @@ static void bond_poll_controller(struct net_device *bond_dev)
>> {
>> }
>>
>> -static void __bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct bonding *bond)
>> +static void bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct net_device *bond_dev)
>> {
>> + struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
>> struct slave *slave;
>> int i;
>>
>> @@ -1258,14 +1259,6 @@ static void __bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct bonding *bond)
>> if (IS_UP(slave->dev))
>> slave_disable_netpoll(slave);
>> }
>> -static void bond_netpoll_cleanup(struct net_device *bond_dev)
>> -{
>> - struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
>> -
>> - read_lock(&bond->lock);
>> - __bond_netpoll_cleanup(bond);
>> - read_unlock(&bond->lock);
>> -}
>>
>> static int bond_netpoll_setup(struct net_device *dev, struct netpoll_info *ni, gfp_t gfp)
>> {
>> @@ -1273,15 +1266,13 @@ static int bond_netpoll_setup(struct net_device *dev, struct netpoll_info *ni, g
>> struct slave *slave;
>> int i, err = 0;
>>
>> - read_lock(&bond->lock);
>> bond_for_each_slave(bond, slave, i) {
>> err = slave_enable_netpoll(slave);
>> if (err) {
>> - __bond_netpoll_cleanup(bond);
>> + bond_netpoll_cleanup(dev);
>> break;
>> }
>> }
>> - read_unlock(&bond->lock);
>> return err;
>> }
>>
>
> .
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/4] bonding: don't call slave_xxx_netpoll under spinlocks
2013-07-20 7:23 [PATCH 1/4] bonding: don't call slave_xxx_netpoll under spinlocks Ding Tianhong
2013-07-20 10:38 ` [1/4] " Veaceslav Falico
@ 2013-07-22 22:48 ` David Miller
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: David Miller @ 2013-07-22 22:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dingtianhong; +Cc: fubar, andy, netdev
I'm waiting for a reposting of this entire series with the requested changes
made to patch #1.
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-07-22 22:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-07-20 7:23 [PATCH 1/4] bonding: don't call slave_xxx_netpoll under spinlocks Ding Tianhong
2013-07-20 10:38 ` [1/4] " Veaceslav Falico
2013-07-22 0:40 ` Ding Tianhong
2013-07-22 22:48 ` [PATCH 1/4] " David Miller
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).