Re: [PATCH net v3 2/2] bonding: fix u32 overflow in compute_gap()

[Hangbin Liu <hangbin.liu@linux.dev>]

On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 10:07:22AM +0800, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> > > > ... this here, as u64_stats_update_begin doesn't provide exclusive access, so writers
> > > > must do that themselves, so you can't be sure what value will end up, the zeroing
> > > > might not work at all and can get overwritten
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I meant - it doesn't improve on the current situation where it can also happen. :)
> 
> Ah, yes. I forgot this. The reset_unbalanced_load() could be called on any
> CPU, which conflicts with other writers.
> 
> I re-checked the code. unbalanced_load is only called in two situations:
> 1. To rebalance the load in bond_alb_monitor(), which only executes once
>    every 10 seconds.
> 2. !tx_slave in bond_do_alb_xmit(), which is only for multicast/broadcast
>    traffic. This traffic shouldn't be significant.
> 
> So looks using spin_lock here is acceptable. What do you think?

I mean, drop the per-CPU design directly and use spin_lock to protect the data.

Hangbin