From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 05/10] net: sched: use Qdisc rcu API instead
 of relying on rtnl lock
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2018 15:04:47 -0700
Message-ID: <CAM_iQpVKEU_RqxDPaTEo2KShKNATsHGJEa64afT-m6iadptNGw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1537168660-24032-1-git-send-email-vladbu@mellanox.com> <1537168660-24032-6-git-send-email-vladbu@mellanox.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
        Kirill Tkhai <ktkhai@virtuozzo.com>,
        Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, mark.rutland@arm.com,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>, christian@brauner.io,
        lucien xin <lucien.xin@gmail.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
        Jiri Benc <jbenc@redhat.com>
To: Vlad Buslov <vladbu@mellanox.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pl1-f193.google.com ([209.85.214.193]:34933 "EHLO
        mail-pl1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1733243AbeITDoz (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 19 Sep 2018 23:44:55 -0400
Received: by mail-pl1-f193.google.com with SMTP id g2-v6so3290381plo.2
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 19 Sep 2018 15:04:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1537168660-24032-6-git-send-email-vladbu@mellanox.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 12:19 AM Vlad Buslov <vladbu@mellanox.com> wrote:
> +static void tcf_qdisc_put(struct Qdisc *q, bool rtnl_held)
> +{
> +       if (!q)
> +               return;
> +
> +       if (rtnl_held)
> +               qdisc_put(q);
> +       else
> +               qdisc_put_unlocked(q);
> +}

This is very ugly. You should know whether RTNL is held or
not when calling it.

What's more, all of your code passes true, so why do you
need a parameter for rtnl_held?