From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 936803B38A9 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2026 19:09:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774379382; cv=none; b=oKROvKM0lMS9c/ESL8oj/TI+rkt51dxQi+IBYmfUyVslEnUOHAMa0kogNgcC88+/JgtkvGZkI4YQx20Ti/q/+3BYuOgA1g7BKDo1F4y6j39iZn8v4K5ErXM0Q9GbopBvfoS+t2ZxOG34Py+K2Nn0rqh5+HAFOuRzyITf0zwB/1g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774379382; c=relaxed/simple; bh=fTuQNWUzWDbINCxBORfSuUo2qq+x1vcH9Vu8CGY+h5Y=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=oZrnGQdRZMJKO/79NN1JD53bbOJeaeJ8pPo0SIxDJoQcnTyajveFNU0v7z5jrNsQgDabxBx0mHIIxi4UvQdZWIifVl4yfMUvVlNsRyhtIhBttK3JYav6vHigx6yL8agfSnm6/fEasuk7OVfNtfa0Bv8JtzQolxDTpg+G7xLGHgA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=paj7Kt5z; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="paj7Kt5z" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 56C2BC4AF09; Tue, 24 Mar 2026 19:09:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1774379381; bh=fTuQNWUzWDbINCxBORfSuUo2qq+x1vcH9Vu8CGY+h5Y=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=paj7Kt5zjTrZMqipnVMHXKk8y6eYuEzGueUfi4Pk3TEpTPvpdp+mI+oEy34VeaX7Y IL5XGtc8xdILB9moRrEpg3h3mmHsUU1ZL9yywNBNAFLf/l5MoBkf3EH/gjOypHVaXX Hxq+etB7gT3bKHTI0YqACsHPk7BU/lS7KyBeks4872t0vpdcftIFA2auE/0JmULklr gv7fZDTaMz75ceCnoB2dMACP4jzl39Dhw0Ldha3hysrdxxAkowhqgl0evN09CUUfH9 LCf2p/seuKrggNEbXu6mcL/gtQ6BhN1N2dxL0xe+i60nGTFC+WFgWRrf9xLR1J91Aw s81xVsSNY8wCg== Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 13:09:40 -0600 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] vrf: Remove unnecessary synchronize_rcu() invocations Content-Language: en-US To: Ido Schimmel , netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, petrm@nvidia.com, lirongqing@baidu.com References: <20260324155521.525292-1-idosch@nvidia.com> <20260324155521.525292-4-idosch@nvidia.com> From: David Ahern In-Reply-To: <20260324155521.525292-4-idosch@nvidia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 3/24/26 9:55 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote: > vrf_rtable_release() and vrf_rt6_release() are called as part of the VRF > device's ndo_uninit() callback. As such, an RCU grace period passes > between the removal of the VRF slaves and the closing of the VRF device > until these functions are invoked. > > Therefore, it should not be possible for any concurrent RCU readers to > try and acquire a reference on the dst entry while we are potentially > releasing the last reference via dst_release(). > > Given the above, the synchronize_rcu() invocations in these functions > seem unnecessary and only add unnecessary delay when deleting VRF > devices. Remove them. > > Reviewed-by: Petr Machata > Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel > --- > drivers/net/vrf.c | 2 -- > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) > Reviewed-by: David Ahern