On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 19:24:43 +0300 Vladimir Oltean wrote: > diff --git a/net/dsa/slave.c b/net/dsa/slave.c > index 743caabeaaa6..a951b2a7d79a 100644 > --- a/net/dsa/slave.c > +++ b/net/dsa/slave.c > @@ -1994,6 +1994,13 @@ int dsa_slave_create(struct dsa_port *port) > ret, slave_dev->name); > goto out_phy; > } > + rtnl_lock(); > + ret = netdev_upper_dev_link(master, slave_dev, NULL); > + rtnl_unlock(); > + if (ret) { > + unregister_netdevice(slave_dev);
The error handling here looks sketchy. First of all please move this unregister to the error path below, not inside the body of the if. Secondly as a rule of thumb the error path should resemble the destroy function. Here we have : unregister_netdevice(slave_dev); out_phy: rtnl_lock(); phylink_disconnect_phy(p->dp->pl); rtnl_unlock(); phylink_destroy(p->dp->pl); out_gcells: gro_cells_destroy(&p->gcells); out_free: free_percpu(p->stats64); free_netdev(slave_dev); port->slave = NULL; return ret; vs. netif_carrier_off(slave_dev); rtnl_lock(); phylink_disconnect_phy(dp->pl); rtnl_unlock(); dsa_slave_notify(slave_dev, DSA_PORT_UNREGISTER); unregister_netdev(slave_dev); phylink_destroy(dp->pl); gro_cells_destroy(&p->gcells); free_percpu(p->stats64); free_netdev(slave_dev); Ordering is different, plus you're missing the dsa_slave_notify() and netif_carrier_off(). > + goto out_phy; > + } > > return 0; > > @@ -2013,11 +2020,13 @@ int dsa_slave_create(struct dsa_port *port) > > void dsa_slave_destroy(struct net_device *slave_dev) > { > + struct net_device *master = dsa_slave_to_master(slave_dev); > struct dsa_port *dp = dsa_slave_to_port(slave_dev); > struct dsa_slave_priv *p = netdev_priv(slave_dev); > > netif_carrier_off(slave_dev); > rtnl_lock(); > + netdev_upper_dev_unlink(master, slave_dev); > phylink_disconnect_phy(dp->pl); > rtnl_unlock();