From: Oscar Maes <oscmaes92@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com,
andrew@lunn.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] pcnet32: stop holding device spin lock during napi_complete_done
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2026 18:41:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260602164158-oscmaes92@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260602024428.1664921-1-kuba@kernel.org>
On Mon, Jun 01, 2026 at 07:44:28PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
> email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
> ---
> pcnet32: stop holding device spin lock during napi_complete_done
>
> This commit removes the lp->lock spinlock hold around napi_complete_done()
> to avoid a potential deadlock with pcnet32_start_xmit() if a GRO flush
> were to occur.
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pcnet32.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pcnet32.c
> > index 911808ab13a79..4f3076d4ea34e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pcnet32.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pcnet32.c
> > @@ -1407,8 +1407,10 @@ static int pcnet32_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
> > pcnet32_restart(dev, CSR0_START);
> > netif_wake_queue(dev);
> > }
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lp->lock, flags);
> >
> > if (work_done < budget && napi_complete_done(napi, work_done)) {
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&lp->lock, flags);
>
> [Severity: High]
> Does dropping the spinlock before napi_complete_done() introduce a race
> condition with shared IRQs that breaks NAPI interrupt mitigation?
>
> If napi_complete_done() clears the NAPIF_STATE_SCHED bit, marking the
> NAPI poll as complete, a shared IRQ could fire on another CPU.
>
> If pcnet32_interrupt() then acquires lp->lock and checks csr0 without
> checking the INTR bit, could it process pending events and successfully
> call napi_schedule_prep()?
>
> If pcnet32_interrupt() schedules NAPI and releases the lock, this code
> would then resume, re-acquire lp->lock, and unconditionally unmask
> device interrupts.
>
> This could leave the system in a state where NAPI is scheduled but
> hardware interrupts are enabled, resulting in an interrupt storm on
> every subsequent packet.
>
> > /* clear interrupt masks */
> > val = lp->a->read_csr(ioaddr, CSR3);
> > val &= 0x00ff;
> > @@ -1416,9 +1418,9 @@ static int pcnet32_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
> >
> > /* Set interrupt enable. */
> > lp->a->write_csr(ioaddr, CSR0, CSR0_INTEN);
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lp->lock, flags);
> > }
> >
> > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&lp->lock, flags);
> > return work_done;
> > }
> --
> pw-bot: cr
The suggested race condition is impossible, even after
calling napi_complete_done all pcnet32 interrupts are masked via CSR3.
pcnet32_interrupt would never be called until the second locked
section in pcnet32_poll, which unmasks the interrupts.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-02 16:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-28 14:03 [PATCH net] pcnet32: stop holding device spin lock during napi_complete_done Oscar Maes
2026-05-28 14:55 ` Alexander Lobakin
2026-05-28 17:07 ` Oscar Maes
2026-05-29 15:21 ` Alexander Lobakin
2026-06-02 2:44 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-06-02 16:41 ` Oscar Maes [this message]
2026-06-02 18:34 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-06-02 18:40 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20260602164158-oscmaes92@gmail.com \
--to=oscmaes92@gmail.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.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