From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@kernel.org>
Cc: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@gmail.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@nvidia.com>,
Gal Pressman <gal@nvidia.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>,
Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 10/11] net/mlx5e: Implement queue mgmt ops and single channel swap
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 11:27:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250127112744.0db2b45a@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z5PrXkL7taguM57W@x130>
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 11:34:54 -0800 Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> On 24 Jan 07:26, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >> Are you expecting drivers to hold netdev_lock internally?
> >> I was thinking something more scalable, queue_mgmt API to take
> >> netdev_lock, and any other place in the stack that can access
> >> "netdev queue config" e.g ethtool/netlink/netdev_ops should grab
> >> netdev_lock as well, this is better for the future when we want to
> >> reduce rtnl usage in the stack to protect single netdev ops where
> >> netdev_lock will be sufficient, otherwise you will have to wait for ALL
> >> drivers to properly use netdev_lock internally to even start thinking of
> >> getting rid of rtnl from some parts of the core stack.
> >
> >Agreed, expecting drivers to get the locking right internally is easier
> >short term but messy long term. I'm thinking opt-in for drivers to have
> >netdev_lock taken by the core. Probably around all ops which today hold
> >rtnl_lock, to keep the expectations simple.
>
> Why opt-in? I don't see any overhead of taking netdev_lock by default in
> rtnl_lock flows.
We could, depends on how close we take the dev lock to the ndo vs to
rtnl_lock. Some drivers may call back into the stack so if we're not
careful enough we'll get flooded by static analysis reports saying
that we had deadlocked some old Sun driver :(
Then there are SW upper drivers like bonding which we'll need at
the very least lockdep nesting allocations for.
Would be great to solve all these issues, but IMHO not a hard
requirement, we can at least start with opt in. Unless always
taking the lock gives us some worthwhile invariant I haven't considered?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-27 19:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-16 21:55 [pull request][net-next 00/11] mlx5 updates 2025-01-16 Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 01/11] net: Kconfig NET_DEVMEM selects GENERIC_ALLOCATOR Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 02/11] net/mlx5e: SHAMPO: Reorganize mlx5_rq_shampo_alloc Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 03/11] net/mlx5e: SHAMPO: Remove redundant params Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 04/11] net/mlx5e: SHAMPO: Improve hw gro capability checking Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 05/11] net/mlx5e: SHAMPO: Separate pool for headers Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 06/11] net/mlx5e: SHAMPO: Headers page pool stats Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 07/11] net/mlx5e: Convert over to netmem Saeed Mahameed
2025-02-05 20:14 ` Mina Almasry
2025-04-09 12:40 ` Dragos Tatulea
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 08/11] net/mlx5e: Handle iov backed netmems Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 09/11] net/mlx5e: Add support for UNREADABLE netmem page pools Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 10/11] net/mlx5e: Implement queue mgmt ops and single channel swap Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 23:21 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-16 23:46 ` Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-16 23:54 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-24 0:39 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2025-01-24 0:55 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-24 3:11 ` Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-24 15:26 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-01-24 19:34 ` Saeed Mahameed
2025-01-27 19:27 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2025-01-16 21:55 ` [net-next 11/11] net/mlx5e: Support ethtool tcp-data-split settings Saeed Mahameed
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=20250127112744.0db2b45a@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dtatulea@nvidia.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=gal@nvidia.com \
--cc=leonro@nvidia.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=saeed@kernel.org \
--cc=saeedm@nvidia.com \
--cc=stfomichev@gmail.com \
--cc=tariqt@nvidia.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.