From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-oo1-f66.google.com (mail-oo1-f66.google.com [209.85.161.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2164039F179 for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2026 22:29:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.161.66 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775514567; cv=none; b=k4tL55/qnWCqPj72Gl+MYZwk1ZUGF/O8Ja+mskJB8aZigVepfHms35L/a8QuKJ4uM2+jKpoBccRV//ZsbSu2rg4xMt1UffR90fqI9vf5TRuThMSUi40Dr89NMQfCXW5dvHjRk8A5j36o3SPAIrC6WJ5RatvnwiDm/uia1ayxxPQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775514567; c=relaxed/simple; bh=LVxqEMqhWdq76kcJM1NeOGxHfgbldjWfrr7AdKo9egA=; h=From:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:Subject:Content-Type; b=mCqZKqOAesXEgIid6MbsyRfUSYGd3V1r22rjni8eWIixb1SYwS6o07VQszM1AaoW4SlkbHGqT8fwR7APrY8PiEARIJhUFmXojQtNQtReJp1ObPWt8kWlHqhfivlaII1h/Dh0wJwKd1W9dYf+eKII2qi8ORBKZFWMrqz6OqohpmU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=c8jAkx5W; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.161.66 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="c8jAkx5W" Received: by mail-oo1-f66.google.com with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-67c22b05346so2501615eaf.2 for ; Mon, 06 Apr 2026 15:29:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1775514565; x=1776119365; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=subject:in-reply-to:cc:to:message-id:date:from:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=cXKQI7WgyKqGZBWGRa2uXVzTyFEOr8G0e8YRMrKRXCc=; b=c8jAkx5W/A+Ng0YIK0+zdiW60hcFhIAxYEX6J5DY9lwMTYX7KmkS+70V9Mb+oXjxj3 BwYoqQOiHeQNv5xo0aJkivSnjez8GPn85yD1rKlV8lHT6FTLEU9j9FovmzzDJZiLbHjn cRowQ+oPDaZp+Ha1bJJBYVf2tI29kOC8txDXkXvUBDg/FkEf0X9dQ61g9F2PH7r3xfT5 SyHT6bqANnLwOZ+MrLly0c0niitrlBO/gzt1NTZeBijD18xcoBwG99KhHC8J9kyKd1HV 9+XZMMKfh093l3cnYZwZm7swevyRV0ybvqIKyiKcEIfkZziUSji+9VmrD+ZjQupYbIyw 3NYQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1775514565; x=1776119365; h=subject:in-reply-to:cc:to:message-id:date:from:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=cXKQI7WgyKqGZBWGRa2uXVzTyFEOr8G0e8YRMrKRXCc=; b=K+A7zoeIux3Yji/hOSSx2upRhFqlioHS516w25u7MzxkirGHafmiz5xzBUsLg/+Dqd t4q9IjgjGz/SwLSvlnmcd0PK2NXZpmS8gepyhs4kh7dgXzkCFXr9oyVEN1K3OsvV/OAZ G6d51Eg/mpW2xzMcDp50ZmN5YWBUtkjdWyQMf93RM8L2jKb1KKqUN0qjqgZbFrnnoRIU p99ugEXIq32pTC2SH1iCk7z116e2RXoIXzyVOqgD8FiReaul29+SIoLYob9dZvXJxc/0 M2F29duOWQlBomzqAdvu4UoYWqSVI8dJq7xExOdwZ5KPUgOzlzSSPgH5F9DfmcbkSpLa uiFQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVcHDWdXrr1VvU4iBSi0L8mMCwUgY/tUc6ldDMkUtPWxGMAXsT6dnSrCElXk32Ud7BxItwFX3I=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwPeHCnjNS8CUBprjrG7ynjN2HCW5lz6DoZ61Fa1W/eoVXMa1Fx ljx9L8WctMs7X2e/C1XJ3H31KHVOaqBanYzeEKrfaOaV3yOlFOqRAGTH X-Gm-Gg: AeBDievssLVzM0Q0dWHryQvPM6/qPW7QQztOeeo24mF7uVBjPvCGpJU7hGOh3+VCA7G uoghUUoxybAShEnSWGjCv+ZBAON1T4/Dav9t34p3OP0dS6WE11hQjUOL9Kp5EtviwuZjeyqo0jK iUUokEti+ypAoCApAYSdeCqIaCP4hc55ZhKvdJq+Bi5dCBQ7JJDSw39Ig6AkIIUtc3rLixWEAjp g46C5q07//po5U0dUs9xYE+6uiaGe4yuxKJmwVh5Zyi4/0qncZO1v/yKtHwyieFJppYUdSrMKia Dd7tGDuOXdMH5eRMERM1b+j0tc7TN5EMMVeEpTZWovhI2SGBlxipGy02xIXJr8ix2qHB53XYaio ho9AxjRwQp0P/T97VP61niimtzCTaRu0s6Sy2wsHnX5v2T9y/c/I/S2MeMkP7BWMOuPRQ/JFb6L UV0IZPhflN3IDnQbT45Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6820:1c83:b0:67e:1b8b:862c with SMTP id 006d021491bc7-6821a14057cmr7653072eaf.0.1775514564994; Mon, 06 Apr 2026 15:29:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2a03:2880:12ff:72::]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 006d021491bc7-6823d419d09sm6837710eaf.15.2026.04.06.15.29.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 06 Apr 2026 15:29:24 -0700 (PDT) From: sdf.kernel@gmail.com Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2026 15:29:24 -0700 Message-ID: <1762d78b034628249764138bee950a87.sdf.kernel@gmail.com> To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: Jakub Kicinski , netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, jiri@resnulli.us, jv@jvosburgh.net In-Reply-To: <20260404000606.2413916-1-kuba@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 03/14] net: move promiscuity handling into netdev_rx_mode_work (ddeab417d841) Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: > This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this > email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible. > --- > net: move promiscuity handling into netdev_rx_mode_work > > This commit moves unicast promiscuity tracking into netdev_rx_mode_work so > it runs under netdev_ops_lock instead of the addr_lock spinlock. It also > changes ASSERT_RTNL() to netdev_ops_assert_locked() in several functions > called from the work queue. > > > diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c > > index 0efac0c730077..08dac9c759996 100644 > > --- a/net/core/dev.c > > +++ b/net/core/dev.c > > @@ -9586,7 +9586,7 @@ int __dev_set_promiscuity(struct net_device *dev, int inc, bool notify) > > kuid_t uid; > > kgid_t gid; > > > > - ASSERT_RTNL(); > > + netdev_ops_assert_locked(dev); > > Can this cause a lockdep assertion failure for unconverted ops-locked devices > using the legacy RX mode path? Correct and addressed later in the series in "net: warn ops-locked drivers still using ndo_set_rx_mode". Don't think there is a better way to split the patches... > Replacing ASSERT_RTNL() with netdev_ops_assert_locked(dev) asserts that > dev->lock is held for devices where netdev_need_ops_lock(dev) is true. > > [ ... ] > > > diff --git a/net/core/dev_addr_lists.c b/net/core/dev_addr_lists.c > > index a05db3ac43ea9..61589537b2d3d 100644 > > --- a/net/core/dev_addr_lists.c > > +++ b/net/core/dev_addr_lists.c > [ ... ] > > @@ -1295,20 +1337,16 @@ void __dev_set_rx_mode(struct net_device *dev) > > if (!netif_device_present(dev)) > > return; > > > > - if (ops->ndo_set_rx_mode_async) { > > + if (ops->ndo_set_rx_mode_async || ops->ndo_change_rx_flags) { > > netif_rx_mode_queue(dev); > > return; > > } > > > > - if (!(dev->priv_flags & IFF_UNICAST_FLT)) { > > - if (!netdev_uc_empty(dev) && !dev->uc_promisc) { > > - __dev_set_promiscuity(dev, 1, false); > > - dev->uc_promisc = true; > > - } else if (netdev_uc_empty(dev) && dev->uc_promisc) { > > - __dev_set_promiscuity(dev, -1, false); > > - dev->uc_promisc = false; > > - } > > - } > > + /* Legacy path for non-ops-locked HW devices. */ > > + > > + promisc_inc = netif_uc_promisc_update(dev); > > + if (promisc_inc) > > + __dev_set_promiscuity(dev, promisc_inc, false); > > If an ops-locked device has not yet been converted to implement the new > ndo_set_rx_mode_async or ndo_change_rx_flags callbacks, this legacy path > will be executed. Same here, addressed later in the series in "net: warn ops-locked drivers still using ndo_set_rx_mode". > > When a secondary unicast address is added to such a device (e.g., by > bringing up a macvlan interface over it) and the device lacks > IFF_UNICAST_FLT, netif_uc_promisc_update() returns 1. This triggers a > synchronous inline call to __dev_set_promiscuity(dev, 1, false). > > Since __dev_set_rx_mode() is invoked from address list helpers like > dev_uc_add() which only hold rtnl_lock() and netif_addr_lock_bh(dev), > dev->lock is not held, which would trigger the new assertion in > __dev_set_promiscuity(). Same.