From: Eli Cohen <eli@dev.mellanox.co.il>
To: Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@voltaire.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>,
general-list <general@lists.openfabrics.org>
Subject: Re: [ofa-general] [PATCH] IB/IPoIB: Fix change mtu when switching to UD mode
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2008 16:42:29 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080701134229.GC14384@mtls03> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <486A1CB1.1020904@voltaire.com>
On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 03:01:53PM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> The calls to dev_set_mtu from the bonding driver are from the device
> .set_mtu function and this means that the caller have taken the appropriate
> locking needed (set mtu is done on the master which in turn does it on the
> slaves). Recently, I worked on some change to bonding and throughout this
> work I learned on the need (must) to call the rtnl locking when invoking a
> dev_set_x function who further does call_netdevice_notifiers(), see
>
> "the correct locking context for the notifier calls (which is RTNL and
> nothing else)"
>
> comment from the bonding maintainer in
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=121201324611292&w=2
>
I see, though I would expect to see a comment stating this requirement
both at the documentation of call_netdevice_notifiers() and that of
dev_set_mtu() and any other exported functions that requires this kind
of locking.
Moreover, in this specific case, it appears that it is not required to
take the rtlnl lock -- if it would be a must, I would have experienced
a dump_stack() due to
ASSERT_RTNL();
in bond_alb_handle_active_change().
The fact that I did not hit such an assert does not mean I may avoid
taking the rtnl lock but it appears to me that the issue is not well
undrestood.
next parent reply other threads:[~2008-07-01 13:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20080630160651.GA6024@mtls03>
[not found] ` <4869CE9C.2050408@voltaire.com>
[not found] ` <20080701071559.GE6024@mtls03>
[not found] ` <486A1CB1.1020904@voltaire.com>
2008-07-01 13:42 ` Eli Cohen [this message]
2008-07-01 13:45 ` [ofa-general] [PATCH] IB/IPoIB: Fix change mtu when switching to UD mode Eli Cohen
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=20080701134229.GC14384@mtls03 \
--to=eli@dev.mellanox.co.il \
--cc=general@lists.openfabrics.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ogerlitz@voltaire.com \
--cc=rdreier@cisco.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).