From: Kalderon, Michal Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 9:05 PM To: David Miller >From: David Miller <[email protected]> >Sent: Tuesday, October 3, 2017 8:17 PM >>> @@ -423,6 +423,41 @@ static void qed_ll2_rxq_parse_reg(struct qed_hwfn >>> *p_hwfn, >>> } >>> >>> static int >>> +qed_ll2_handle_slowpath(struct qed_hwfn *p_hwfn, >>> + struct qed_ll2_info *p_ll2_conn, >>> + union core_rx_cqe_union *p_cqe, >>> + unsigned long *p_lock_flags) >>> +{ >>... >>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&p_rx->lock, *p_lock_flags); >>> + >> >>You can't drop this lock. >> >>Another thread can enter the loop of our caller and process RX queue >>entries, then we would return from here and try to process the same >>entries again. > >The lock is there to synchronize access to chains between >qed_ll2_rxq_completion >and qed_ll2_post_rx_buffer. qed_ll2_rxq_completion can't be called from >different threads, the light l2 uses the single sp status block we have. >The reason we release the lock is to avoid a deadlock where as a result of >calling >upper-layer driver it will potentially post additional rx-buffers.
Dave, is there anything else needed from me on this? Noticed the series is still in "Changes Requested". thanks, Michal
