From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com,
pabeni@redhat.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, horms@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net: opt loopback into instance locking
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 11:15:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260922111507.6fae8770@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <arGd3auaaTerBqNb@devvm7509.cco0.facebook.com>
On Mon, 21 Sep 2026 14:14:19 -0700 Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 09/21, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > v2:
> > - move setting the request flag from gen_lo_setup() to loopback_setup()
> > to avoid splats on the blackhole dev which we don't care about
>
> Acked-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>
>
> (mostly because dummy is also ops locked, don't think loopback should
> bring any problems)
Stan, the issue Matt reported in the BPF CI is a generic sw device +
netdev lock issue. We are triggering it on lo because.. probability,
but it reproduces with dummy + netkit already today.
Do you recall why we have separate classes for each device type?
Classes make the lock_set_cmp_fn() ineffective across different device
types. Quick test removing the classes and sticking to just the cmp fn
seems make lockdep happy, I'm running the ksft suite now. But maybe you
can tell me if it's the right idea before it finishes..?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-22 18:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-21 19:04 [PATCH net-next v2] net: opt loopback into instance locking Jakub Kicinski
2026-09-21 21:14 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2026-09-22 18:15 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-09-22 19:21 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2026-09-22 7:11 ` Matthieu Baerts
2026-09-24 2:40 ` [syzbot ci] " syzbot ci
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=20260922111507.6fae8770@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sdf.kernel@gmail.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