Thread (5 messages) 5 messages, 3 authors, 2025-02-13

Re: [PATCH v1 net-next] checkpatch: Discourage a new use of rtnl_lock() variants.

From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Date: 2025-02-13 11:03:57


On 2/11/25 8:04 AM, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
rtnl_lock() is a "Big Kernel Lock" in the networking slow path
and still serialises most of RTM_(NEW|DEL|SET)* rtnetlink requests.

Commit 76aed95319da ("rtnetlink: Add per-netns RTNL.") started a
very large, in-progress, effort to make the RTNL lock scope per
network namespace.

However, there are still some patches that newly use rtnl_lock(),
which is now discouraged, and we need to revisit it later.

Let's warn about the case by checkpatch.

The target functions are as follows:

  * rtnl_lock()
  * rtnl_trylock()
  * rtnl_lock_interruptible()
  * rtnl_lock_killable()

and the warning will be like:

  WARNING: A new use of rtnl_lock() variants is discouraged, try to use rtnl_net_lock(net) variants
  #18: FILE: net/core/rtnetlink.c:79:
  +	rtnl_lock();

Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <redacted>
---
It would be nice if this patch goes through net-next.git to catch
new rtnl_lock() users by netdev CI.
---
 scripts/checkpatch.pl | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
index 7b28ad331742..09d5420436cc 100755
--- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl
+++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl
@@ -6995,6 +6995,12 @@ sub process {
 #			}
 #		}
 
+# A new use of rtnl_lock() is discouraged as it's being converted to rtnl_net_lock(net).
+		if ($line =~ /^\+.*\brtnl_(try)?lock(_interruptible|_killable)?\(\)/) {
I think you need to add '\s*' just before  '\(' to avoid the test being
fooled by some bad formatting.
Also I'm unsure if the '^\+.*' header is strictly required - it should
but some/most existing tests don't use it, do you know why?

Thanks,

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