From: Cosmin Ratiu <cratiu@nvidia.com>
To: "liuhangbin@gmail.com" <liuhangbin@gmail.com>
Cc: "shuah@kernel.org" <shuah@kernel.org>,
"andrew+netdev@lunn.ch" <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"jv@jvosburgh.net" <jv@jvosburgh.net>,
"jarod@redhat.com" <jarod@redhat.com>,
"razor@blackwall.org" <razor@blackwall.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
Jianbo Liu <jianbol@nvidia.com>,
"pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"horms@kernel.org" <horms@kernel.org>,
"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@nvidia.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"steffen.klassert@secunet.com" <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>,
"linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 net 1/3] bonding: move IPsec deletion to bond_ipsec_free_sa
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 10:25:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3a5a4d5f943a361d55f1454d2a7c3189eb398c40.camel@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z8bFaXOH_Iwi-Nuj@fedora>
On Tue, 2025-03-04 at 09:18 +0000, Hangbin Liu wrote:
>
> Just to make sure I added the lock in correct place, would you please
> help
> confirm.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> index e85878b12376..c59ad3a5cf43 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> @@ -537,19 +537,25 @@ static void bond_ipsec_add_sa_all(struct
> bonding *bond)
> }
>
> list_for_each_entry(ipsec, &bond->ipsec_list, list) {
> + spin_lock_bh(&ipsec->xs->lock);
> /* Skip dead xfrm states, they'll be freed later. */
> - if (ipsec->xs->km.state == XFRM_STATE_DEAD)
> + if (ipsec->xs->km.state == XFRM_STATE_DEAD) {
> + spin_unlock_bh(&ipsec->xs->lock);
Instead of unlocking on every branch, I recommend adding a "next:" tag
before the unlock at the end of the loop and switching the "continue"
statements with "goto next".
> continue;
> + }
>
> /* If new state is added before ipsec_lock acquired
> */
> - if (ipsec->xs->xso.real_dev == real_dev)
> + if (ipsec->xs->xso.real_dev == real_dev) {
> + spin_unlock_bh(&ipsec->xs->lock);
> continue;
> + }
>
> ipsec->xs->xso.real_dev = real_dev;
> if (real_dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_add(ipsec-
> >xs, NULL)) {
> slave_warn(bond_dev, real_dev, "%s: failed
> to add SA\n", __func__);
> ipsec->xs->xso.real_dev = NULL;
> }
Add the "next:" tag here.
> + spin_unlock_bh(&ipsec->xs->lock);
> }
> out:
> mutex_unlock(&bond->ipsec_lock);
> @@ -614,6 +620,7 @@ static void bond_ipsec_del_sa_all(struct bonding
> *bond)
> if (!ipsec->xs->xso.real_dev)
> continue;
The above if should be in the critical section as well.
>
> + spin_lock_bh(&ipsec->xs->lock);
> if (ipsec->xs->km.state == XFRM_STATE_DEAD) {
> /* already dead no need to delete again */
> if (ipsec->xs->xso.real_dev == real_dev &&
> @@ -621,6 +628,7 @@ static void bond_ipsec_del_sa_all(struct bonding
> *bond)
> real_dev->xfrmdev_ops-
> >xdo_dev_state_free(ipsec->xs);
> list_del(&ipsec->list);
> kfree(ipsec);
> + spin_unlock_bh(&ipsec->xs->lock);
And I recommend the same thing with "goto next" here, jumping at the
end of the loop, before the unlock.
> continue;
> }
>
> @@ -635,6 +643,7 @@ static void bond_ipsec_del_sa_all(struct bonding
> *bond)
> if (real_dev->xfrmdev_ops-
> >xdo_dev_state_free)
> real_dev->xfrmdev_ops-
> >xdo_dev_state_free(ipsec->xs);
> }
> + spin_unlock_bh(&ipsec->xs->lock);
> }
> mutex_unlock(&bond->ipsec_lock);
> }
>
> Thanks
> Hangbin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-04 10:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-27 8:37 [PATCHv3 net 0/3] bond: fix xfrm offload issues Hangbin Liu
2025-02-27 8:37 ` [PATCHv3 net 1/3] bonding: move IPsec deletion to bond_ipsec_free_sa Hangbin Liu
2025-02-27 8:50 ` Nikolay Aleksandrov
2025-02-27 9:21 ` Nikolay Aleksandrov
2025-02-27 13:21 ` Hangbin Liu
2025-02-27 13:31 ` Nikolay Aleksandrov
2025-02-28 2:20 ` Hangbin Liu
2025-02-28 10:31 ` Cosmin Ratiu
2025-02-28 11:07 ` Nikolay Aleksandrov
2025-02-28 11:10 ` Nikolay Aleksandrov
2025-02-28 12:59 ` Hangbin Liu
2025-03-04 9:18 ` Hangbin Liu
2025-03-04 10:25 ` Cosmin Ratiu [this message]
2025-02-27 8:37 ` [PATCHv3 net 2/3] bonding: fix xfrm offload feature setup on active-backup mode Hangbin Liu
2025-02-27 8:37 ` [PATCHv3 net 3/3] selftests: bonding: add ipsec offload test Hangbin Liu
2025-02-27 13:59 ` Petr Machata
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=3a5a4d5f943a361d55f1454d2a7c3189eb398c40.camel@nvidia.com \
--to=cratiu@nvidia.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=jarod@redhat.com \
--cc=jianbol@nvidia.com \
--cc=jv@jvosburgh.net \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liuhangbin@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=razor@blackwall.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox