Thread (5 messages) flat view 5 messages, 2 authors, 2021-09-14

Questioning requirement for ASSERT_RTNL in indirect code

From: Eli Cohen <hidden>
Date: 2021-09-14 06:05:11

Hi,

I see the same assert and the same comment, "All callback list access
should be protected by RTNL.", in the following locations

drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt_tc.c:1873
drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/rep/tc.c:303
drivers/net/ethernet/netronome/nfp/flower/offload.c:1770

I assume the source of this comment is the same. Can you guys explain
why is this necessary?

Currently, with
74fc4f828769 ("net: Fix offloading indirect devices dependency on qdisc order creation"

the assert will emit a warning into dmesg with no other noticable
effect. I am thinking maybe we need to remove this assert.

Comments?

- Eli
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help