Re: [PATCH net-next] can: grcan: move napi_enable() from under spin lock

[Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>]

On 11/01/2025 at 11:47, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> I don't see any reason why napi_enable() needs to be under the lock,
> only reason I could think of is if the IRQ also took this lock
> but it doesn't. napi_enable() will soon need to sleep.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>

Acked-by: Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>

> ---
> Marc, if this is correct is it okay for me to take via net-next
> directly? I have a bunch of patches which depend on it.

Even if the question is not addressed to me, I am personally fine if
this directly goes into net-next.

> CC: mkl@pengutronix.de
> CC: mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr
> CC: linux-can@vger.kernel.org
> ---
>  drivers/net/can/grcan.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/grcan.c b/drivers/net/can/grcan.c
> index cdf0ec9fa7f3..21a61b86f67d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/can/grcan.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/can/grcan.c
> @@ -1073,9 +1073,10 @@ static int grcan_open(struct net_device *dev)
>  	if (err)
>  		goto exit_close_candev;
>  
> +	napi_enable(&priv->napi);
> +
>  	spin_lock_irqsave(&priv->lock, flags);
>  
> -	napi_enable(&priv->napi);
>  	grcan_start(dev);
>  	if (!(priv->can.ctrlmode & CAN_CTRLMODE_LISTENONLY))
>  		netif_start_queue(dev);


Yours sincerely,
Vincent Mailhol