On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 14:13 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet
> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 20:40:01 -0700
>
> > Let look at tun->pcpu_stats, for example.
> >
> > It is allocated at line 1831, before the register_netdevice()
> >
> > drivers/net/tun.c does not provide ndo_init()
>
> I
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 20:40:01 -0700
> Let look at tun->pcpu_stats, for example.
>
> It is allocated at line 1831, before the register_netdevice()
>
> drivers/net/tun.c does not provide ndo_init()
I see the problem now.
And it's done this way because several steps need to
On Fri, 2017-08-18 at 15:58 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet
> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 06:13:49 -0700
>
> > On Thu, 2017-08-17 at 22:21 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Eric Dumazet
> >> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:30:40 -0700
> >>
> >> > So we do not really know if we need to
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 06:13:49 -0700
> On Thu, 2017-08-17 at 22:21 -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Eric Dumazet
>> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:30:40 -0700
>>
>> > So we do not really know if we need to clean up or not.
>>
>> We always know, the answer is that whenever reg
On Thu, 2017-08-17 at 22:21 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet
> Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:30:40 -0700
>
> > So we do not really know if we need to clean up or not.
>
> We always know, the answer is that whenever register_netdev() fails we
> never need to perform any cleanup which i
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 15:30:40 -0700
> So we do not really know if we need to clean up or not.
We always know, the answer is that whenever register_netdev() fails we
never need to perform any cleanup which is done by priv_destructor.
> Any idea how to fix the issue ?
Your p
David
If I read correctly this commit :
cf124db566e6b036b8bcbe8decbed740bdfac8c6
("net: Fix inconsistent teardown and release of private netdev state.")
We have problems in drivers providing priv_destructor
and handling a failure in register_netdevice()
register_netdevice() might h
On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 7:07 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Cong Wang wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>>> list_add(&priv->list, &list_of_things);
>>>
>>> ret = register_netdevice(); // if ret is < 0, then destru
On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>> list_add(&priv->list, &list_of_things);
>>
>> ret = register_netdevice(); // if ret is < 0, then destruct above is
>> automatically called
>>
>> // RACE WITH L
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 7:24 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> list_add(&priv->list, &list_of_things);
>
> ret = register_netdevice(); // if ret is < 0, then destruct above is
> automatically called
>
> // RACE WITH LIST_ADD/LIST_DEL!! It's impossible to call list_add
> only
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 4:24 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>
> if (!ret)
> pr_info("Yay it worked!\n");
>
> return 0;
This is supposed to be `return ret;`. See, even in psuedocode it's
hard to get right.
Hey guys,
I see why this priv_destructor patch is an acceptable bandaid for
certain drivers, but I'm not exactly sure on the cleanest way of using
it in new drivers. Check out the following psuedocode.
Here's how error handling in newlink used to work before this patch:
static void destruct(stru
On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 14:54:34 -0400 (EDT)
David Miller wrote:
> From: Stephen Hemminger
> Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 10:21:04 -0700
>
> > Is there anything in Documentation/networking/netdevices.txt about this to
> > avoid any future issues?
>
> You asked me about this last time, and I did not for
From: Stephen Hemminger
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 10:21:04 -0700
> Is there anything in Documentation/networking/netdevices.txt about this to
> avoid any future issues?
You asked me about this last time, and I did not forget about it.
I sincerely lack the time to do a writeup about it, and I felt t
On Wed, 07 Jun 2017 15:54:11 -0400 (EDT)
David Miller wrote:
> Network devices can allocate reasources and private memory using
> netdev_ops->ndo_init(). However, the release of these resources
> can occur in one of two different places.
>
> Either netdev_ops->ndo_uninit() or netdev->destructor
From: Johannes Berg
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2017 16:33:47 +0200
> Right. Do you want me to put that into my tree? I could do it tonight,
> or perhaps only Monday though.
Please submit it formally to netdev for me to apply.
I want to queue it up with the original patch for -stable to make
sure all the
On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 10:17 -0400, David Miller wrote:
>
> > I guess this must mean that that all others are dealing with the
> > problem "manually", right? Perhaps needs_free_netdev isn't all that
> > necessary then?
>
> Yeah, the major two modes of operation are manual freeing of the
> netdev (
From: Johannes Berg
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2017 14:45:25 +0200
> Under drivers/ in general, I count more than 400 calls to
> register_netdev[ice](), but only 39 that set the new needs_free_netdev.
> Some will overlap and have the same ops, but still, that's a rather
> small portion of them. The logic
Hi Dave,
I hope you don't mind a question or two for my understanding here.
Actually, this got pretty long... but I think there's a bug in here.
(For background, I'm looking into this because I'm interested in what
to do about backporting this to older kernels, or better, how to deal
with it in
Network devices can allocate reasources and private memory using
netdev_ops->ndo_init(). However, the release of these resources
can occur in one of two different places.
Either netdev_ops->ndo_uninit() or netdev->destructor().
The decision of which operation frees the resources depends upon
wh
From: Stephen Hemminger
Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 12:13:59 -0700
> Thanks for addressing a confusing and messy semantic. If you merge
> this then it would be good to update the documentation in
> Doucmentation/networking to describe how drivers are supposed to
> behave.
Will do.
> An alternative an
On Mon, 08 May 2017 12:52:43 -0400 (EDT)
David Miller wrote:
> Network devices can allocate reasources and private memory using
> netdev_ops->ndo_init(). However, the release of these resources
> can occur in one of two different places.
>
> Either netdev_ops->ndo_uninit() or netdev->destructor
Network devices can allocate reasources and private memory using
netdev_ops->ndo_init(). However, the release of these resources
can occur in one of two different places.
Either netdev_ops->ndo_uninit() or netdev->destructor().
The decision of which operation frees the resources depends upon
wh
23 matches
Mail list logo
