Re: [PATCH net-next v3] net: phy: Fix suspicious rcu_dereference usage
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Date: 2025-01-21 10:02:34
Also in:
lkml
On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 10:38:45AM +0100, Kory Maincent wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:12:28 -0800 Jakub Kicinski [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:19:25 +0100 Kory Maincent wrote:quoted
The path reported to not having RTNL lock acquired is the suspend path of the ravb MAC driver. Without this fix we got this warning:I maintain that ravb is buggy, plenty of drivers take rtnl_lock from the .suspend callback. We need _some_ write protection here, the patch as is only silences a legitimate warning.Indeed if the suspend path is buggy we should fix it. Still there is lots of ethernet drivers calling phy_disconnect without rtnl (IIUC) if probe return an error or in the remove path. What should we do about it?
They could trigger the same warning, although I think they would be relatively safe because register_netdev() hasn't been called, and thus nothing that the netdev provides should be used. (If it can be used, as the driver has not completed initialisation, then it's probably racy anyway.) I don't think throwing ASSERT_RTNL() into phy_detach() will do anything to solve this. If the RCU warning doesn't trigger (because phy_detach() only gets called on error which practically never happens) then ASSERT_RTNL() isn't going to trigger either. Warnings in functions will only work when they're called in a context that will trigger the warning! So, I think it's something that can only be addressed by reviewing drivers and patching. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!