From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09D881BC2A for ; Tue, 13 May 2025 00:26:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747096011; cv=none; b=iOY+rr1NEghz6TlCx0s699zLdPwM8fuaPhlihOzslPGUVUNWuLSQR2ZcDE5j37Dk73O8llcOzuOHsIw0KyfNBf877htM/8XtPMlu9sS7/6R2TnT30a8V0S2vRMWK/j/brfI5q3HTqqLSTZjHkPXCTHG87yJ1Rz6z/HSFYNQiBcI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747096011; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SsCzQDH2Uf/5xi+iMWl7ByaMb5F8BgLpErxT1Nw/kWY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=QqzWfxxx/vjh7mAKxkDCXcRcVND6xEB+4IyMh/o9Fof/vDH2T+Bjx6rSByR0huYHIlIZo1rOysfX6mgb5o9sNFYCZ+2eBnhQwKlhP21VNQ2ILckIbUqE9xbMRrRXNar9zBA2fH7fpLmEy5thORNiVCuCKPfFJx+NK/OZNSiGvgE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=FH3f+MAY; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="FH3f+MAY" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2C787C4CEE7; Tue, 13 May 2025 00:26:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1747096010; bh=SsCzQDH2Uf/5xi+iMWl7ByaMb5F8BgLpErxT1Nw/kWY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=FH3f+MAYTS2zTkeUZqTwInN6rtQj6+SxQXZY1ljO0QFEg6Ls8gxKoqQs5UmdHfCli T5WClTI3M+QlwKwlkwvY2HDvULHkaD7B+SLVXvAqAszPFNlQxhx1x6uGRiTMY06afG oXB4Uh7jos6AiQC6Vc3Vgs5dAWF78XiRoxzSP1USUw97UUPrRclObVfaDZnxV128b8 fE/p7jMMb+eP+DpBghPdryeudBgHMjO2AALwfyiiRaD44Hg84YNSt9Xuo/ON1k5zNk nSteF4ccVn/9JeTVs+8gmiE8kBB/+xKpSxOqk7E6/xt4TvBI1C2ivFHLs1kzm/Vv5x aTSh5LVXRFcFQ== Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 17:26:49 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Stanislav Fomichev Cc: Michael Chan , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, pavan.chebbi@broadcom.com, andrew.gospodarek@broadcom.com, sdf@fomichev.me, Kalesh AP Subject: Re: [PATCH net] bnxt_en: bring back rtnl_lock() in bnxt_fw_reset_task() Message-ID: <20250512172649.31800d90@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20250512063755.2649126-1-michael.chan@broadcom.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 12 May 2025 16:43:12 -0700 Stanislav Fomichev wrote: > On 05/12, Michael Chan wrote: > > On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 7:20=E2=80=AFAM Stanislav Fomichev wrote: =20 > > > Will the following work instead? netdev_ops_assert_locked should take > > > care of asserting either ops lock or rtnl lock depending on the device > > > properties. =20 > >=20 > > It works for netif_set_real_num_tx_queues() but I also need to replace > > the ASSERT_RTNL() with netdev_ops_assert_locked(dev) in > > __udp_tunnel_nic_reset_ntf(). =20 >=20 > Sounds good! Mm... To me it sounds concerning. UDP tunnel port tracking doesn't have any locks, it depends on RTNL. Are y'all sure we can just drop the ASSERT_RTNL() and nothing will blow up? Or did I misunderstand? I'd go with Michael's patch for net and revisit in net-next if you're filling bold.