From: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@google.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@kernel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@blackwall.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Bobby Eshleman <bobbyeshleman@meta.com>,
David Wei <dw@davidwei.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 3/4] net: devmem: support leased queues on netdev unregister
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2026 16:10:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <au0aYjNLRjagTLEA@devvm16445.scu0.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261103232659.1340283-4-almasrymina@google.com>
On 11/03, Mina Almasry wrote:
> Previously, bind_dev was only populated when bind-tx was called on a
> virtual netdev (where map_dev != netdev), and leased RX bindings stored
> the virtual netdev in map_dev without tracking the physical backing
> netdev at all. Unregistering either the virtual device or the physical
> backing device while a leased RX or TX devmem binding was active failed
> to detach the dma-buf cleanly.
>
> Always populate both device pointers on struct
> net_devmem_dmabuf_binding:
> - map_dev: the physical net_device whose dma_dev holds the DMA mapping
> (resolved from leased RX queues in netdev_nl_get_dma_dev(), with its
> netdev_lock held across net_devmem_bind_dmabuf()).
> - bind_dev: the net_device the user called bind-rx or bind-tx on (equal
> to map_dev for direct bindings, or the virtual device for leased
> bindings).
>
> With both pointers tracked on all bindings, handle socket teardown,
> queue uninstall, and netdev unregistration in either order (bind_dev
> first or map_dev first):
> - Lock &binding->bind_dev during socket teardown in
> netdev_nl_sock_priv_destroy(), close and erase bound_rxqs via
> binding->bind_dev in net_devmem_unbind_dmabuf(), and require
> binding->map_dev to remain non-NULL in net_devmem_get_binding().
> - Clear binding->bind_dev in mp_dmabuf_devmem_uninstall() once
> bound_rxqs is empty, leaving unleased bindings mapped until the
> binding is freed or map_dev is unregistered.
> - In net_devmem_dev_unregister(dev), if binding->bind_dev == dev, clear
> NET_DEVMEM_BINDING_LIVE and clear binding->bind_dev if bound_rxqs is
> empty or dev is not a queue leasee; if binding->map_dev == dev, clear
> NET_DEVMEM_BINDING_LIVE, unmap the dmabuf, and clear binding->map_dev.
> - Reject new bindings and RX queue opens in net_devmem_bind_dmabuf() and
> __netif_mp_open_rxq() if bind_dev or map_dev is no longer
> NETREG_REGISTERED.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@google.com>
> ---
> net/core/devmem.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> net/core/devmem.h | 8 ++--
> net/core/netdev-genl.c | 33 ++++++++++-----
> net/core/netdev_rx_queue.c | 5 +++
> 4 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/devmem.c b/net/core/devmem.c
> index 6446355e787d4..1d6b89f196e02 100644
> --- a/net/core/devmem.c
> +++ b/net/core/devmem.c
> @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ net_devmem_dmabuf_binding_unmap(struct net_devmem_dmabuf_binding *binding)
>
> /**
> * net_devmem_lock_dev() - lock a binding's net_device pointer if still alive
> - * @dev_ptr: pointer to the net_device field on a devmem binding
> + * @dev_ptr: pointer to &binding->map_dev or &binding->bind_dev
> * @dev_tracker: reftracker for the held net_device reference
> *
> * Safely dereference @dev_ptr, acquire netdev_lock() on the device, and
> @@ -95,17 +95,18 @@ net_devmem_dmabuf_binding_unmap(struct net_devmem_dmabuf_binding *binding)
> * Invariant: *@dev_ptr is set once at bind time and is only ever cleared to
> * NULL while holding netdev_lock() on that device (in
> * mp_dmabuf_devmem_uninstall(), net_devmem_unbind_dmabuf(), or
> - * net_devmem_dev_unregister() during NETDEV_UNREGISTER before
> - * synchronize_net() and netdev_run_todo() free the net_device).
> + * net_devmem_dev_unregister(), all before synchronize_net() and
> + * netdev_run_todo() free the net_device).
> *
> * Taking rcu_read_lock() guarantees that a non-NULL device read from
> * *@dev_ptr has not yet completed unregister_netdevice_many_notify()
> * (which waits for an RCU grace period via synchronize_net() after
> - * NETDEV_UNREGISTER before freeing the net_device), so netdev_hold() can
> - * safely acquire a reference before sleeping on netdev_lock(). Once
> - * netdev_lock() is held, re-checking that READ_ONCE(*dev_ptr) == dev
> - * guarantees that the device has not yet been detached from the binding and
> - * cannot finish unregistering until net_devmem_unlock_dev().
> + * NETDEV_UNREGISTER and ndo_uninit before freeing the net_device), so
> + * netdev_hold() can safely acquire a reference before sleeping on
> + * netdev_lock(). Once netdev_lock() is held, re-checking that
> + * READ_ONCE(*dev_ptr) == dev guarantees that the device has not yet been
> + * detached from the binding and cannot finish unregistering until
> + * net_devmem_unlock_dev().
> *
> * Return: The locked and held net_device if *@dev_ptr is still non-NULL,
> * or NULL if already cleared.
> @@ -219,22 +220,24 @@ void net_devmem_unbind_dmabuf(struct net_devmem_dmabuf_binding *binding)
> if (binding->list.next)
> list_del(&binding->list);
>
> - xa_for_each(&binding->bound_rxqs, xa_idx, rxq) {
> - const struct pp_memory_provider_params mp_params = {
> - .mp_priv = binding,
> - .mp_ops = &dmabuf_devmem_ops,
> - };
> + if (binding->bind_dev) {
> + xa_for_each(&binding->bound_rxqs, xa_idx, rxq) {
> + const struct pp_memory_provider_params mp_params = {
> + .mp_priv = binding,
> + .mp_ops = &dmabuf_devmem_ops,
> + };
>
> - rxq_idx = get_netdev_rx_queue_index(rxq);
> + xa_erase(&binding->bound_rxqs, xa_idx);
What's the reason we start xa_erase'ing here?
> + rxq_idx = get_netdev_rx_queue_index(rxq);
>
> - if (netif_mp_close_rxq(binding->map_dev, rxq_idx, &mp_params))
> - busy = true;
> - }
> + if (netif_mp_close_rxq(binding->bind_dev, rxq_idx,
> + &mp_params))
> + busy = true;
> + }
>
> - if (binding->direction == DMA_FROM_DEVICE && binding->map_dev &&
> - !busy) {
> - net_devmem_dmabuf_binding_unmap(binding);
> - WRITE_ONCE(binding->map_dev, NULL);
> + if (binding->direction == DMA_FROM_DEVICE && !busy)
> + net_devmem_dmabuf_binding_unmap(binding);
> + WRITE_ONCE(binding->bind_dev, NULL);
> }
>
> percpu_ref_kill(&binding->ref);
> @@ -252,24 +255,20 @@ void net_devmem_dev_unregister(struct net_device *dev)
>
> xa_lock(&net_devmem_dmabuf_bindings);
> xa_for_each(&net_devmem_dmabuf_bindings, xa_idx, binding) {
> - if (binding->direction == DMA_FROM_DEVICE) {
> - if (READ_ONCE(binding->map_dev) != dev ||
> - xa_get_mark(&net_devmem_dmabuf_bindings, xa_idx,
> - NET_DEVMEM_BINDING_LIVE))
> - continue;
> - } else {
> - if (READ_ONCE(binding->bind_dev) == dev)
> - WRITE_ONCE(binding->bind_dev, NULL);
> - if (READ_ONCE(binding->map_dev) != dev)
> - continue;
> - WRITE_ONCE(binding->bind_dev, NULL);
> + if (READ_ONCE(binding->bind_dev) == dev) {
> __xa_clear_mark(&net_devmem_dmabuf_bindings, xa_idx,
> NET_DEVMEM_BINDING_LIVE);
> + if (xa_empty(&binding->bound_rxqs) ||
> + !netif_is_queue_leasee(dev))
> + WRITE_ONCE(binding->bind_dev, NULL);
> }
> + if (READ_ONCE(binding->map_dev) != dev)
> + continue;
>
> + __xa_clear_mark(&net_devmem_dmabuf_bindings, xa_idx,
> + NET_DEVMEM_BINDING_LIVE);
> xa_unlock(&net_devmem_dmabuf_bindings);
> - if (!netif_is_queue_leasee(dev))
> - net_devmem_dmabuf_binding_unmap(binding);
> + net_devmem_dmabuf_binding_unmap(binding);
> xa_lock(&net_devmem_dmabuf_bindings);
> WRITE_ONCE(binding->map_dev, NULL);
> }
> @@ -324,6 +323,15 @@ net_devmem_bind_dmabuf(struct net_device *map_dev,
> size_t i;
> long err;
>
> + netdev_assert_locked(bind_dev);
> + netdev_assert_locked(map_dev);
> +
[..]
> + if (bind_dev->reg_state != NETREG_REGISTERED ||
> + map_dev->reg_state != NETREG_REGISTERED) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "Device is being unregistered");
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
> + }
I saw Dragos asking about these, I'm confused as well on why we need them.
> +
> if (!dma_dev) {
> NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "Device doesn't support DMA");
> return ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP);
> @@ -560,9 +568,9 @@ struct net_devmem_dmabuf_binding *net_devmem_get_binding(struct sock *sk,
> * net_device.
> */
> dst_dev = dst_dev_rcu(dst);
> - if (unlikely(!dst_dev) ||
> - unlikely(dst_dev != READ_ONCE(binding->map_dev) &&
> - dst_dev != READ_ONCE(binding->bind_dev))) {
> + if (unlikely(!dst_dev || !READ_ONCE(binding->map_dev) ||
> + (dst_dev != READ_ONCE(binding->map_dev) &&
> + dst_dev != READ_ONCE(binding->bind_dev)))) {
Now we READ_ONCE(map_dev) twice? Time to add a map_dev var and do it once?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-06 0:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-03 23:26 [PATCH net-next v1 0/4] net: devmem: support leased RX and TX queues on netdev unregister Mina Almasry
2026-11-03 23:26 ` [PATCH net-next v1 1/4] net: devmem: pass net_device pointer to net_devmem_lock_dev() Mina Almasry
2026-11-04 13:44 ` Dragos Tatulea
2026-11-03 23:26 ` [PATCH net-next v1 2/4] net: devmem: rename binding dev and vdev to map_dev and bind_dev Mina Almasry
2026-11-04 13:43 ` Dragos Tatulea
2026-11-03 23:26 ` [PATCH net-next v1 3/4] net: devmem: support leased queues on netdev unregister Mina Almasry
2026-11-04 13:42 ` Dragos Tatulea
2026-11-06 0:10 ` Stanislav Fomichev [this message]
2026-11-03 23:26 ` [PATCH net-next v1 4/4] selftests: net: add leased devmem RX and TX netdev unregister tests Mina Almasry
2026-11-04 13:54 ` Dragos Tatulea
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=au0aYjNLRjagTLEA@devvm16445.scu0.facebook.com \
--to=sdf.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=almasrymina@google.com \
--cc=bobbyeshleman@meta.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dw@davidwei.uk \
--cc=edumazet@kernel.org \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=razor@blackwall.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
/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