Netdev List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
To: Yousef Alhouseen <alhouseenyousef@gmail.com>
Cc: alex.aring@gmail.com,  stefan@datenfreihafen.org,
	andrew+netdev@lunn.ch,  davem@davemloft.net,
	 edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,  pabeni@redhat.com,
	 linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
	syzbot+4707bb8a43a42fca2b97@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ieee802154: hwsim: free PIB after unregistering hardware
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 2026 17:10:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87jyr8jgr8.fsf@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuQ4bWf+o_ZDMXn1tTw30veo-30Mt9XZehT8BPErJ30Kx_95A@mail.gmail.com> (Yousef Alhouseen's message of "Fri, 3 Jul 2026 04:19:42 -0700")

Hello Yousef,

On 03/07/2026 at 04:19:42 -07, Yousef Alhouseen <alhouseenyousef@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Miquel,
>
> After ieee802154_unregister_hw() returns, the driver callbacks that
> can replace phy->pib have been quiesced, and hwsim_del() has exclusive
> ownership of the final teardown. The pointer is no longer being
> fetched inside an RCU read-side critical section, so rcu_dereference()
> is not appropriate there.

That's right.

> rcu_dereference_protected(phy->pib, 1) expresses that there can no
> longer be a concurrent updater at that point; the protection condition
> is the completed unregister rather than a locally held lock. The value
> is only fetched so the final object can be passed to kfree_rcu().

While I believe this is indeed true, it actually feels slightly overkill
since there is no updater anymore and, as far as I understand, the only
thing that we need here is to get the pointer value for freeing, right?

> rcu_access_pointer() would also be sufficient for that limited use if
> you prefer it, and I can use that spelling in a v2.

If you don't mind, I feel like rcu_access_pointer() is exactly what we
need here. It is also more understandable, even though I agree in
practice there are no differences in this case.

Thanks,
Miquèl

      reply	other threads:[~2026-07-06 15:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-27 23:58 [PATCH net] ieee802154: hwsim: free PIB after unregistering hardware Yousef Alhouseen
2026-07-03 11:15 ` Miquel Raynal
2026-07-03 11:19   ` Yousef Alhouseen
2026-07-06 15:10     ` Miquel Raynal [this message]

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=87jyr8jgr8.fsf@bootlin.com \
    --to=miquel.raynal@bootlin.com \
    --cc=alex.aring@gmail.com \
    --cc=alhouseenyousef@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wpan@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stefan@datenfreihafen.org \
    --cc=syzbot+4707bb8a43a42fca2b97@syzkaller.appspotmail.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