From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: davem@davemloft.net
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com,
andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, horms@kernel.org, jdamato@fastly.com,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH net-next 03/11] net: make netdev_lock() protect netdev->reg_state
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 19:51:09 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250114035118.110297-4-kuba@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250114035118.110297-1-kuba@kernel.org>
Protect writes to netdev->reg_state with netdev_lock().
From now on holding netdev_lock() is sufficient to prevent
the net_device from getting unregistered, so code which
wants to hold just a single netdev around no longer needs
to hold rtnl_lock.
We do not protect the NETREG_UNREGISTERED -> NETREG_RELEASED
transition. We'd need to move mutex_destroy(netdev->lock)
to .release, but the real reason is that trying to stop
the unregistration process mid-way would be unsafe / crazy.
Taking references on such devices is not safe, either.
So the intended semantics are to lock REGISTERED devices.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
---
include/linux/netdevice.h | 2 +-
net/core/dev.c | 6 ++++++
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
index 0e008ce9d5ee..bdbc5849469c 100644
--- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
+++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
@@ -2448,7 +2448,7 @@ struct net_device {
* Should always be taken using netdev_lock() / netdev_unlock() helpers.
* Drivers are free to use it for other protection.
*
- * Protects: @net_shaper_hierarchy.
+ * Protects: @reg_state, @net_shaper_hierarchy.
* Ordering: take after rtnl_lock.
*/
struct mutex lock;
diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
index 5c1e71afbe1c..2ded6eedb4cc 100644
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -10778,7 +10778,9 @@ int register_netdevice(struct net_device *dev)
ret = netdev_register_kobject(dev);
+ netdev_lock(dev);
WRITE_ONCE(dev->reg_state, ret ? NETREG_UNREGISTERED : NETREG_REGISTERED);
+ netdev_unlock(dev);
if (ret)
goto err_uninit_notify;
@@ -11052,7 +11054,9 @@ void netdev_run_todo(void)
continue;
}
+ netdev_lock(dev);
WRITE_ONCE(dev->reg_state, NETREG_UNREGISTERED);
+ netdev_unlock(dev);
linkwatch_sync_dev(dev);
}
@@ -11658,7 +11662,9 @@ void unregister_netdevice_many_notify(struct list_head *head,
list_for_each_entry(dev, head, unreg_list) {
/* And unlink it from device chain. */
unlist_netdevice(dev);
+ netdev_lock(dev);
WRITE_ONCE(dev->reg_state, NETREG_UNREGISTERING);
+ netdev_unlock(dev);
}
flush_all_backlogs();
--
2.47.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-14 3:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-14 3:51 [PATCH net-next 00/11] net: use netdev->lock to protect NAPI Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 3:51 ` [PATCH net-next 01/11] net: add netdev_lock() / netdev_unlock() helpers Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 12:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 22:45 ` Joe Damato
2025-01-14 3:51 ` [PATCH net-next 02/11] net: add helpers for lookup and walking netdevs under netdev_lock() Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 13:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 14:45 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 22:53 ` Joe Damato
2025-01-14 23:51 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 3:51 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2025-01-14 13:05 ` [PATCH net-next 03/11] net: make netdev_lock() protect netdev->reg_state Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 22:57 ` Joe Damato
2025-01-14 3:51 ` [PATCH net-next 04/11] net: add netdev->up protected by netdev_lock() Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 13:08 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 23:09 ` Joe Damato
2025-01-14 3:51 ` [PATCH net-next 05/11] net: protect netdev->napi_list with netdev_lock() Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 13:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 23:10 ` Joe Damato
2025-01-14 3:51 ` [PATCH net-next 06/11] net: protect NAPI enablement " Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 13:14 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 23:00 ` Francois Romieu
2025-01-14 3:51 ` [PATCH net-next 07/11] net: make netdev netlink ops hold netdev_lock() Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 13:16 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 3:51 ` [PATCH net-next 08/11] net: protect threaded status of NAPI with netdev_lock() Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 13:19 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 3:51 ` [PATCH net-next 09/11] net: protect napi->irq " Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 13:20 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 23:19 ` Joe Damato
2025-01-14 3:51 ` [PATCH net-next 10/11] net: protect NAPI config fields " Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 13:23 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 23:20 ` Joe Damato
2025-01-14 3:51 ` [PATCH net-next 11/11] netdev-genl: remove rtnl_lock protection from NAPI ops Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-14 13:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-14 23:21 ` Joe Damato
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250114035118.110297-4-kuba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=jdamato@fastly.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.