From: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com>,
andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com,
horms@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
sdf@fomichev.me
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: let lockdep compare instance locks
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 10:50:40 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aCd68HA340VLNbHt@mini-arch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250516101441.5ad5b722@kernel.org>
On 05/16, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2025 08:22:43 -0700 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 May 2025 19:59:41 -0700 Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> > > > Is the thinking that once the big rtnl lock disappears in cleanup_net
> > > > the devices are safe to destroy without any locking because there can't
> > > > be any live users trying to access them?
> > >
> > > I hope yes, but removing VF via sysfs and removing netns might
> > > race and need some locking ?
> >
> > I think we should take the small lock around default_device_exit_net()
> > and then we'd be safe? Either a given VF gets moved to init_net first
> > or the sysfs gets to it and unregisters it safely in the old netns.
>
> Thinking about it some more, we'll have to revisit this problem before
> removing the big lock, anyway. I'm leaning towards doing this for now:
+1
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-16 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-16 1:24 [PATCH net-next] net: let lockdep compare instance locks Jakub Kicinski
2025-05-16 1:49 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-16 2:36 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-05-16 2:59 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-16 15:22 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-05-16 17:14 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-05-16 17:50 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-16 17:50 ` Stanislav Fomichev [this message]
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=aCd68HA340VLNbHt@mini-arch \
--to=stfomichev@gmail.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@amazon.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
/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.